Ethnic Geography

ETHNIC GEOGRAPHY OF THE HUNGARIAN MINORITIES IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN

1

2

ETHNIC GEOGRAPHY OF THE

HUNGARIAN MINORITIES IN THE

CARPATHIAN BASIN by

KÁROLY KOCSIS ESZTER KOCSIS-HODOSI

GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE RESEARCH CENTRE FOR EARTH SCIENCES and MINORITY STUDIES PROGRAMME HUNGARIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Budapest, 1998

3

Layout: ZOLTÁN KERESZTESI Translation by: LÁSZLÓ BASSA Translation revised by: MARION MERRICK Cartography: LIVIA KAISER, ZSUZSANNA KERESZTESI Technical board: MARGIT CSAPKA-LACZKÓ, ISTVÁN POÓR

ISBN 963 7395 84 9

Preparation for printing carried out at the Geographical Research Institute Research Centre For Earth Sciences Hungarian Academy of Sciences (Budapest, Hungary) The preparation of the manuscript was sponsored by the Illyés Közalapítvány (Foundation) and by the Hungarian National Research Fund (OTKA, Project T 22831), Budapest

Copyright © 1998 by Károly Kocsis and Eszter Kocsis-Hodosi. All rights reserved. Reprint or reproduction, even in part, in all forms such as microfilm, xerox copy, microfiche or offset, strictly prohibited. Printed in Hungary by EXEON Bt.

4

To our children Ágnes, Levente and Attila

5

6

CONTENTS

List of Figures List of Tables INTRODUCTION Chapter 1 HUNGARIAN MINORITIES IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN General Outline An outline of the present ethnic geographic, the demographic and the social situation of the Hungarian minorities in the Carpathian Basin Chapter 2 THE HUNGARIANS OF SLOVAKIA The natural environment Ethnic processes during the past five hundred years The present territory of Hungarian settlementin Slovakia Chapter 3 THE HUNGARIANS OF TRANSCARPATHIA The natural environment Ethnic processes during the past five hundred years The present territory of hungarian settlement in Transcarpathia Chapter 4 THE HUNGARIANS OF TRANSYLVANIA The natural environment Ethnic processes during the past five hundred years The present territory of hungarian settlement in Transylvania Hungarian Ethnic Enclaves in Historical Transylvania Hungarians in the Partium Region (Arad, Bihar, Szilágy, Szatmár and Máramaros counties) Hungarian Ethnic Enclaves in the Bánát Chapter 5 THE HUNGARIANS OF VOJVODINA The natural environment Ethnic processes during the past five hundred years The present territory of Hungarian settlement in vojvodina Chapter 6 THE HUNGARIANS OF CROATIA The natural environment Ethnic processes during the past five hundred years The present territory of hungarian settlement in Croatia Chapter 7 THE HUNGARIANS OF THE TRANSMURA REGION The natural environment Ethnic processes during the past five hundred years The present territory of hungarian settlement in the Transmura region Chapter 8 THE HUNGARIANS OF BURGENLAND (ŐRVIDÉK) The natural environment Ethnic processes during the past five hundred years The present territory of Hungarian settlement in Burgenland (Őrvidék) REGISTER

9 10 13 15 15 24 38 38 40 71 77 77 79 93 99 99 101 125 132 134 135 137 137 138 158 162 162 164 182 187 187 187 193 194 194 195 202 205

7

8

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Ethnic map of Hungary (late 15th century) 2. Ethnic map of Hungary (1773) 3. Ethnic map of Hungary (1910) and the Trianon border (1920) 4. Change in the number of ethnic Hungarians in Transylvania, Slovakia, Vojvodina and Transcarpathia according to the census data (1880–1990) 5. Percentage of the Hungarian minorities in the Carpathian Basin (around 1990) 6. The largest Hungarian communities beyond the borders of Hungary (around 1990) 7. Important Hungarian geographical names in South Slovakia 8. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of Slovakia (late 15th century) 9. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of Slovakia (late 18th century) 10. Change in the population number of the main ethnic groups on the present-day territory of Slovakia (1880–1991) 11. Ethnic map of present-day territory of Slovakia (1910) 12. Change in the ethnic structure of population in selected cities and towns of present-day Slovakia (1880–1991) 13. Bilingual (Hungarian – Slovak) population in present-day South Slovakia (1941) 14. Hungarian communities in present-day South Slovakia (1941, 1961 and 1991) 15. Ethnic map of Slovakia (1991) 16. Important Hungarian geographical names in Transcarpathia 17. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of Transcarpathia (late 15 th century) 18. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of Transcarpathia (late 18 th century) 19. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of Transcarpathia (1910) 20. Ethnic map of Transcarpathia (1989) 21. Hungarian communities in Transcarpathia (1989) 22. Important Hungarian geographical names in Transylvania 23. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of Transylvania (late 15th century) 24. Change in the number of Hungarians, Rumanians and Germans on the historical territory of Transylvania (1495 - 1910) 25. Change in the ethnic structure of population on the historical territory of Transylvania (16 th–20th century) 26. Change in the population number of ethnic Hungarians in major areas of Transylvania (1880–1992) 27. Change in the population number of the main ethnic groups on the present-day territory of Transylvania (1880–1992) 28. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of Transylvania (1910) 29. Change in the ethnic structure of population in selected municipalities of Transylvania (1880–1992) 30. Ethnic map of Transylvania (1992) 31. Percentage of ethnic Hungarians in the municipalities, towns and communes of Transylvania (1992) 32. Hungarian communities in Transylvania (1992) 33. Important Hungarian geographical names in Vojvodina 34. Change in the ethnic territory of Hungarians on the present-day territory of Vojvodina (11th–20th century) 35. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of Vojvodina (1910) 36. Serbian (Yugoslav) colonization in Vojvodina (1918 – 1941) 37. Change in the ethnic structure of population in selected cities and towns of the present-day Vojvodina (1880 –1991) 38. Hungarian colonization in Bácska (1941-1944)

9

39. Serbian and Hungarian losses in Bácska (1941 – 1945) 40. Ethnic map of Vojvodina (1991) 41. Hungarian communities in Vojvodina (1991) 42. Serbian refugees in Vojvodina (1996) 43. Important Hungarian geographical names in Croatia 44. Change in the number of Hungarians in different parts of Croatia (1880 - 1991) 45. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of East Croatia (1910) 46. Change in the ethnic structure of the Croatian Baranya (1880 – 1992) 47. Ethnic map of East Croatia (1991) 48. Hungarians and the War of 1991 in East Croatia 49. Important Hungarian geographical names in the Transmura Region 50. Ethnic map of the present-day Slovenian-Hungarian borderland (1910, 1991) 51. Important Hungarian geographical names in Burgenland 52. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of Burgenland (late 15th century, 1773, 1910, 1991) 53. Hungarian communities in Burgenland (1923, 1991)

LIST OF TABLES 1. Hungarians in different regions of the World (around 1990) 2. National minorities of Europe by population size (around 1990) 3. Percentage of Europe's national minorities compared to the total population of their ethnic groups 4. Change in the number and percentage of the Hungarian minorities in different regions of the Carpathian Basin (1880 - 1991) 5. Ethnic reciprocity in the countries of the Carpathian Basin (around 1990) 6. The largest Hungarian communities beyond the borders of Hungary in the Carpathian Basin, according to census data (around 1980 and 1990) 7. Ethnic structure of the population of Upper Hungary (1495 -1919) 8. Ethnic structure of the population on the present-day territory of Slovakia (1880 - 1991) 9. Change in the ethnic structure of selected cities and towns of present-day-day Slovakia (1880 - 1991) 10. The changing ethnic majority of selected settlements in present-day-day South Slovakia (1495 - 1991) 11. The new regions (kraj) of Slovakia and the Hungarian minority 12. Selected new districts (okres) of Slovakia and the Hungarian minority 13. The largest Hungarian communities in Slovakia (1991) 14. Towns in Slovakia with an absolute Hungarian majority (1991) 15. Ethnic structure of the population of historical Northeast Hungary (1495-1910) 16. Ethnic structure of the population on the present-day territory of Transcarpathia (1880 - 1989) 17. Change in the ethnic structure of selected settlements of present-day-day Transcarpathia (1880 - 1989) 18. The largest Hungarian communities in Transcarpathia (1989) 19. Change in the ethnic structure of the population on the historical territory of Transylvania (1495 - 1910) 20. Ethnic structure of the population on the present-day territory of Transylvania (1880 - 1992) 21. Change in the number of ethnic Hungarians in major areas of Transylvania (1880 - 1992) 22. Change in the ethnic structure of selected cities and towns of Transylvania (1880 - 1992) 23. Change in the ethnic structure of the population of selected counties of Transylvania (1910 - 1992) 24. Towns in Transylvania with an absolute Hungarian majority (1992) 25. The largest Hungarian communities in Transylvania (1956, 1986 and 1992)

10

26. Ethnic structure of the population of the present-day territory of Vojvodina (1880 - 1996) 27. Change in the ethnic structure of selected cities and towns of Vojvodina (1880 - 1991) 28. The largest Hungarian communities in Vojvodina (1991) 29. Towns in Vojvodina with an absolute Hungarian majority (1991) 30. Ethnic structure of the population of Croatian Baranya (1840 - 1992) 31. Ethnic structure of the population on the present-day territory of Croatia (1900 - 1991) 32. Change in the number of Hungarians in different parts of Croatia (1881 - 1991) 33. Ethnic structure of the population on the present-day territory of Transmura Region (1880 - 1991) 34. Ethnic structure of the population of Alsólendva - Lendava (1880 - 1991) 35. Ethnic structure of the population on the present-day territory of Burgenland (1880 - 1991) 36. Change in the ethnic structure of selected settlements of Burgenland (1880 - 1991)

11

INTRODUCTION

Since the 17th and 18th centuries, the Carpathian Basin1 has become one of the most diverse and conflict-ridden macroregions of Europe from both an ethnic and religious perspective. During the last century no social or ideological system has succeeded in easing the tensions which have arisen from both the intricate intermingling of different ethnic groups, and the existence of the new, rigid state borders which fail to take into account the ethnic, cultural and historical traditions, economic conditions, and centuries-old production and commercial contacts. Not even communist internationalist ideology (from 1948 to 1989) was able to solve this problem. On the contrary, the ethnic tensions that had been concealed or denied for forty years have since surfaced with an elemental force. As a result, in the years since the collapse of communism, nationalist governments sensitive only to the interests of state forming nations (ethnic groups) gained power. National minorities reacted in self-defence by reorganising and establishing their cultural organisations and political parties. Following the collapse of the former socialist economic system and an upsurge of nationalism and chauvinism, minorities have once again become the source of both interethnic tensions and inter-state conflicts. This is especially true of the Hungarian minorities in the Carpathian Basin. The majority of countries which gained Hungarian territories in 1920 continue to consider them as the main supporters of Hungarian irredentism and revanchism. The need for geographical research on the Hungarian national minorities in the Carpathian Basin can be explained not only by the enormous thirst for information in academic, governmental and general public circles, but also by the political events of the recent past. Geography, since its beginnings, has played and continues to play an important role in the education and formation of national self-consciousness both in Hungary and abroad. Right up to the end of World War I, when the Hungarian Kingdom that had extended throughout the entire Carpathian Basin for almost one thousand years was partitioned, geographical research and the education of the nation corresponded to that of the actual country. After the 1920s, however, the relationship of Hungarian geography to the Hungarian nation and state was divided into two main eras. The first era lasted from 1920 until 1945. With one sudden blow, the Peace Treaty of Trianon (1920) forced one third of the Hungarian nation to live as minorities as foreigners. In this era, ethnic, political and economic geography became the main scientific source of revisionist and irredentist demands. As a result, the study of the geography of the lost territories and their Hungarian populations played an exceptionally important role in scientific research and education. 1The Carpathian Basin is a synonym for the territory of historical Hungary in the everyday language of Hungary. From a geographical point of view it includes at least three great basins: Little Hungarian Plain (Kisalföld), the Great Hungarian Plain (Alföld) and the Transylvanian Basin

13

During the four decades following the 1940s, in order to avoid conflict with neighbouring Communist allied countries, and in accordance with the proletarian internationalist ideology of the region, the relationship of geography with the Hungarian national minorities was characterised by totally opposite principles. Study of the nation was equated with a study of the Hungarian state. Fear of accusations of nationalism, chauvinism or irredentism led to a consideration of the Hungarians of the Carpathian Basin living outside the borders of Hungary as being almost non-existent. The centuries-old Hungarian names of regions and settlements inhabited by Hungarians were also omitted, intentionally or by ignorance, both in the press and in school-books. Unfortunately, this fact contributed to increasing national despair in society as well as to a fall in the amount of literature written in Hungarian. From this point of view, the situation has improved considerably since then, but school books still hardly mention the Hungarian minorities of several millions living over the border. For this reason, several generations have grown up in the last decades for whom Hungarian geographical names such as Csallóköz, Gömör, Párkány, Beregszász, Nagykároly, Sepsiszentgyörgy and Zenta sound just as exotic as Buenos Aires, Capetown, Teheran or Peking. During their trips to neighbouring countries people are genuinely surprised by the local population's knowledge of Hungarian and by the presence of the several hundreds of thousands of Hungarians. This has, of course, only increased the thirst for information regarding Hungarians living outside the borders. In recent years, a considerable number of people have voiced the demand that after seven decades of extremist attitudes, the millions of Hungarians living next door should finally be offered a place in Hungarian science and education, as they deserve. The first chapter outlines the position of Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin among European minorities, the relationship between changes in population and political events in the 20th century, and the present ethnic geographic, demographic and social situation of the Hungarian minorities in the Carpathian Basin. In the remaining chapters the natural environment and changes in the territory of Hungarian settlement is explored further between the 15th and 20th centuries.

14

Chapter 1

HUNGARIAN MINORITIES IN THE CARPATHIAN BASIN

General Outline

Out of a total 14,1 million ethnic Hungarians in the world — a number corresponding to the population of Australia — 92 % live in the Carpathian Basin on the historical territory of Hungary (Tab. 1). There are 3.2 million European Hungarians living outside the borders of present-day Hungary, forming the largest minority in Europe1, apart from the 15.1 million ethnic Russians, and having the same size as the population of Ireland while outnumbering the population of 87 countries in the world (e.g. Mongolia, Libya) (Tab. 2). If the number of people of minority status is compared to the number of their entire ethnic group, then Hungarians are among the first with a rate of 25.9%. In Europe, only the Albanians and the Irish are above the Hungarians on the list — with a proportion of 30-42% of the ethnic group living outside the borders of their country (Tab. 3). During the period following the Hungarian Conquest of the Carpathian Basin (896), its natural environment and capacity to support a large population were the most decisive factors influencing the limits of the area populated by the forefathers of the Hungarians. At this time, Hungarians mainly inhabited the steppes and lightly-forested areas, the strategically important valleys and the hills, which reminded them of the landscape of their previous homeland, while it suited their half-nomadic way of life. Later, with a change in lifestyle to an agricultural way of life, and with a demographic rise, the Hungarian ethnic borders were extended to the verge of the high mountainous regions (Fig. 1). In the times of the Ottoman (Turkish) occupation demographic losses were proportionate to the geopolitical and geographical position of the population. The diminishing Hungarian ethnical area and its shrinking borders were mainly felt in southern parts, that is in the neighbourhood of the Ottoman Empire, and in the flatlands and strategically unfavourable zones like in some valleys or basins (such as the Transylvanian Basin). The present-day Székely2 ethnic area owes its existence to its favourable geographical position as well as its former autonomous status. 1 Excluding the Turkish and Italian migrant-workers ("Gastarbeiters") of 3 million each. 2 Székelys (Hungarian: Székelyek, German: Szeklers, Rumanian: Secui, Latin: Siculi).

Hungarian ethnographical group in the middle of Rumania, in Southeast Transylvania. Their ethnic origin is a controversial question. During the 10th and 11th centuries they lived as border guards and

15

Table 1. Hungarians in different regions of the World (around 1990) Country, region 1. Hungary 2. Slovakia 3. Ukraine 4. Rumania 5. Yugoslavia 6. Croatia 7. Slovenia 8. Austria 2–8. total 9. Czech Republic 10. Germany 11. Netherlands 12. Belgium 13. United Kingdom 14. France 15. Switzerland 16. Italy 17. Sweden 18. Russia 19. other European countries 2–19. total 20. Europe total 21. USA 22. Canada 23. Latin American countries 24. South Africa 25. Other African countries 26. Israel 27. Other Asian countries 28. Australia 29. New Zealand and Oceania 21–29. total 30.World total

Total 10,222,000 608,000 180,000 1,640,000 350,000 20,000 9,000 33,000 2,840,000 20,000 120,000 5,000 10,000 25,000 50,000 20,000 5,000 25,000 20,000 17,000 3,157,000 13,379,000 450,000 73,000 100,000 10,000 10,000 27,000 30,000 36,000 5,000 741,000 14,120,000

Carpathian Basin 10,222,000 608,000 168,000 1,620,000 345,000 19,000 8,000 7,000 2,775,000

2,775,000 12,997,000

Sources: 1–8. Census data (native tongue). 22., 26., 28. Britannica. Book of the year 1992, 9–21., 2325., 27., 29. Estimations of K. Kocsis and of the organizations of the Hungarian minorities (Databank of the World Federation of Hungarians, Budapest).

auxiliary troops in disperate groups along the borders of the Hungarian settlement area (e.g. Banat, Syrmia, Southwest Transdanubia (Dunántúl), present-day South Slovakia, Bihar county). In the 12th and 13th centuries the majority of them were concentrated in the eastern bordeland of Hungary. This was a very underpopulated, wooded area endangered by Patzinak and Mongol invasions. As a border guard, privileged population they have lived till the 14th century in "clan" organisation, after that in seven districts ("szék") under the leadership of the bailiff (Hungarian: "ispán") of all Székelys, of the local representative of the king of Hungary in power. Since the Middle Ages their increasing, by economical and political reasons motivated emigration from the overpopulated and underdeveloped Székely Region to Moldavia demographical reinforced the Roman Catholic Csángó-Hungarians of Moldavia.

16

Table 2. National minorities of Europe by population size (around 1990) National minorities 1. Russians 2. Hungarians 3. Turks 4. Italians 5. Germans 6. Albanians 7. Irish 8. Poles 9. Ukrainians 10.Portugueses 11.Serbs 12.Spanish 13.Belarussians 14.French 15.Greeks 16.Rumanians, Moldavians, Vlachs

Total number 15,120,000 3,157,000 3,000,000 2,600,000 2,445,000 2,390,000 2,300,000 1,669,000 1,528,000 1,030,000 983,000 953,000 860,000 670,000 564,000 540,000

Sources: Geografichesky Entsiklopedichesky Slovar. Ponyatia i terminy. (Treshnikov, A.F. /ed./1988, Moscow, pp. 420-426., Census data: 1989 (USSR), 1992 (Rumania), 1991 (Yugoslavia, Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Czechoslovakia), Britannica. Book of the Year 1991, London, pp. 758-761. Remarks: The national minorities include “Gastarbeiters (migrant workers)” on the territory of Europe excluding Russia and Turkey. The state borders of 01.01.1993 are considered.

Table 3. Percentage of Europe's national minorities compared to the total population of their ethnic groups (around 1990) National minorities 1. Albanians 2. Irish 3. Macedonians 4. Hungarians 5. Muslimans 6. Slovenes 7. Serbs 8. Russians 9. Slovaks 10. Croats 11. Belarussians 12. Portugueses 13. Finns 14. Turks 15. Bulgarians

Percentage 42.0 30.3 25.2 20.3 18.7 13.6 10.7 10.3 9.4 8.7 8.4 7.6 6.4 5.7 5.0

Sources, remarks: see Table 2.

The next stage in the history of ethnic Hungarian territory is characterised in the mass migrations of the 18th century, following an evening out in number of the popu-

17

Figure 1. Ethnic map of Hungary (late 15th century)

lation. Masses of people from the ethnic peripheries moved to the great basins located in the Great Hungarian Plain or the Transylvanian Basin which were formerly almost depopulated or sparsely inhabited, but offered great productivity and were rich in different natural resources. The result of this process was the dislocation of the Hungarian-Slovak, Hungarian-Ruthenian, Hungarian-Rumanian ethnic borders at the expense of the ethnic Hungarians (Fig. 2.). The present-day area of Hungarian rural settlement did not change significantly after the 18th century, only occasionally was it violently modified (e.g. deportations between 1945-1948, genocide in 1944, etc.) or slightly changed by both natural and forced assimilation. We cannot speak of Hungarian minorities in the Carpathian Basin until 1920, the year of the peace treaty of Trianon and the partitioning of the historical territory of Hungary. The detached areas had constituted an organic part of Hungary from the 10 th century up to 1920. From then on, Hungarians lived first in five, then from 1991 in eight different countries: Hungary, Slovakia (starting in 1993), Ukraine (Transcarpathia), Rumania (Transylvania), Yugoslavia — Serbia (Vojvodina), Croatia, Slovenia (Transmura Region) — and Austria (Burgenland). During the past seven decades their "dismembered" situation determined their destiny and their statistical numbers as registered by the Czechoslovak, Rumanian, Yugoslav etc. official censuses. According to the last Hungarian census (1910) in the total territory of historical Hungary, 33% of the total number of Hungarians living in the Carpathian Basin — approximately 3.3 million people — lived on the territories that are now outside the new

18

Figure 2. Ethnic map of Hungary (1773)

Hungarian national borders. In the period following the peace treaty of Trianon these people experienced a change of status from that of a majority to one of a minority for the first time in history. Thus, they became the target for anti-Hungarian revenge by Slovaks, Rumanians, and Serbs. Their geographical position also changed fundamentally, since the areas they inhabited — with the one exception of the Székely regions — had all formerly been in the central area of the Hungarian state. After 1920 these areas became heavily militarised frontier zones on the periphery of the neighbouring countries (Fig. 3.). According to the data of the National Office for Refugees (Budapest) about 350,000 Hungarians fled to the new territory of Hungary in the period between 1918 1924. The greatest number (197,035) left territories annexed to Rumania, others (106,841) came from areas given to Czechoslovakia, and the rest (44,903) emigrated from their native lands which then belonged to the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes3. Ethnic status is a very subjective social structural element. It relies on the personal beliefs of the individual, and is much influenced by the prevailing ideological and political system. For this reason the number of individuals making up the various ethnic groups is determined by many factors: natural increase or decrease of population and migration, fluctuations in the declaration of ethnicity at censuses, demographic proc3 Petrichevich-Horváth E. 1924 Jelentés az Országos Menekültügyi Hivatal négy évi működéséről (Report about the activity of the National Office for Refugees) , Budapest

19

20 Figure 3. Ethnic map of Hungary (1910) and the Trianon border (1920) Source: Dami, A. 1929 La Hongrie de Demain, Paris

esses such as assimilation, and differences in data relating to the mother tongue, the language used at home, ethnic origins, etc. Between the two wars the most striking phenomenon in this respect was that Jews and Gypsies were listed in different categories in Czechoslovakia and Rumania. This diminished the number of those people who considered themselves to be Hungarian primarily in Transcarpathia, Slovakia and Transylvania, as compared to the statistics of 1910 (Tab. 4., Fig.4.). An important factor in the rapid statistical decrease in the number of Hungarians now living in minority groups was the fact that the many bilingual and bicultural groups living along the borders declared themselves to be Slovaks, Ruthenians (now Ukrainians), Rumanians, Serbs or Croats, but not Hungarians. This was the case with the population in the areas around Nyitra, Érsekújvár, Léva, Kassa and Tőketerebes in Slovakia, the western part of the Nagyszőlős district in Transcarpathia, and certain areas in the counties of Szatmár and Szilágy in Rumania. Compared to these places, the decrease in the number of Hungarians living in smaller communities (in Burgenland or Slavonia) was less dramatic. These phenomena led to a fall in the number of Hungarians firstly in Transylvania and Slovakia, and to some extent in Croatia, Burgenland and Transcarpathia.

Figure 4. Change in the number of ethnic Hungarians in Transylvania, Slovakia, Vojvodina and Transcarpathia according to the census data (1880–1990)

21

Transcarpathia Transylvania Vojvodina Transmura Region Croatia (Ukraine) (Rumania) (Yugoslavia) (Slovenia) number percent. number percent. number percent. number percent. number percent. number percent. 574,862 23.1 M 105,343 25.7 M 1,045,098 26.1 M 265,287 22.6 M 1.9 M 13,221 17.7 M 49,560 881,326 30.2 M 185,433 30.6 M 1,658,045 31.7 M 425,672 28.1 M 119,874 3.5 M 20,737 23.0 M 585,434 17.6 N 116,584 15.9 N 1,480,712 25.8 M 376,176 23.2 M 1.7 M 15,050 – 66,040 761,434 21.5 M 233,840 27.3 M 1,711,851 28.9 M 456,770 28.5 M – 16,510 20.1 M 64,431 354,532 10.3 N 139,700 17.3 N 1,481,903 25.7 M 418,180 25.8 N 1.4 N 10,246 10.8 N 51,399 518,782 12.4 N 146,247 15.9 N 1,616,199 25.9 M 442,560 23.9 N 1.0 N 9,899 11.0 N 42,347 552,006 12.2 N 151,122 14.5 N 1,625,702 24.2 M 423,866 21.7 N 0.8 N 9,064 10.0 N 35,488 559,801 11.2 N 158,446 13.7 N 1,691,048 22.5 N 385,356 18.9 N 0.6 N 8,617 9.5 N 25,439 567,296 10.8 N 155,711 12.5 N 1,604,266 20.8 N 339,491 16.9 N 0.5 N 7,636 8.5 N 22,355 Slovakia

6,763

4,147

5,673

5,642

5,251

–

26,225 10,442

2.8 U

1.5 U

2.1 U

2.1 U

1.9 U

–

9.0 M 3.5 M

Burgenland (Austria) number percent. 11,162 4.2 M

Sources: Census data (Slovakia: 1880, 1910, 1930, 1941, 1950, 1961, 1970, 1980, 1991 ; Transcarpathia:1880, 1910, 1930, 1941, 1959, 1969, 1979, 1989; Transylvania : 1880, 1910, 1930, 1941, 1948, 1956, 1966, 1977, 1992; Vojvodina, Croatia, Transmura Region: 1880, 1910, 1931, 1941, 1948, 1961, 1971, 1981, 1991; Burgenland: 1880, 1910, 1934, 1951, 1961, 1971, 1981, 1991). Remark: Hungarians include the Székelys (Secui) and Csángós (Ceangãi). Abbreviations: M– mother (native) tongue, N– ethnicity, E– ethnic origin, U– every-day language (“Umgangssprache”)

1991

1980

1970

1961

1950

1941

1910 1930

1880

Year

Table 4. Change in the number and percentage of the Hungarian minorities in different regions of the Carpathian Basin (1880 –1991)

Between 1938 and 1941 there was a lull in the rapid fall in the number of Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin when areas with a compact Hungarian population were given back to Hungary e.g. present-day Southern Slovakia, Transcarpathia, Northern Transylvania, Bácska, Southeast Baranya, and the Transmura Region. In these territories the number of Hungarians increased considerably, especially in the present-day territories of Transcarpathia, Slovakia and Transylvania. This followed the appearance of Hungarian government officials (civil servants, a police force and army), an influx of Hungarian colonists from Bukovina and the fact that the majority of Jews also belonged to the Hungarian ethnic community. After the Second World War, according to census data from the neighbouring states, the total numbers in the Hungarian minorities shrank from 3.2 million (in 1941) to 2.4 million. Among the main factors contributing to this decrease between 1944-48 were migration (fleeing their homes, expulsions, or deportations). 125,000 Hungarians fled to present-day Hungarian territory, or were deported from Rumania; 120,500 from Czechoslovakia; 45,500 from Yugoslavia; and 25,000 from Transcarpathia (belonging then to the Soviet Union, and now to Ukraine). At the same time the Czechoslovakian government deported 44,000 Hungarians to the Czech regions between 1945-1947, from where Germans had fled or had been deported, in order to press for a gradual Czechoslovak-Hungarian "population exchange". Besides emigration and the casualties during the war, came the annihilation of Jewish Hungarians — the numbers of Hungarians in neighbouring countries was mostly diminished by the fact that those groups, whose awareness of nationality was not very strong continually vacillated and now declared themselves to belong to the majority population. In South Slovakia, there was a process of "re-Slovakization", while the general anti-Hungarian atmosphere also contributed to the diminishing number of Hungarians, especially in Slovakia, Transcarpathia and Transylvania. In areas belonging to former Yugoslavia (Bácska, Bánát), in spite of the vendetta of the Serbs in October-November 1944, which claimed approximately 20,000 civilian casulaties, the number of Hungarians was dropping far slower. This fact is partly explained by the fact that the Germans preferred to declare themselves Hungarian from fear of persecution. During the last 40 years the number of minority Hungarians in statistical reports was greatly influenced by the specific socio-economic system of the different countries, their various policies towards ethnic minorities, and the "maturity" of the majority population in each country. In Serbia (Vojvodina), Croatia and the Transmura Region of Slovenia, the number of Hungarians either increased or remained unchanged up to the 1960s. From then on with the chance of working in the West, or with the appearance of the "Yugoslav" category in the ethnic statistics, the number of Hungarians in the former Yugoslavia started to diminish dramatically. The natural increase of Hungarians in Transylvania was counterbalanced — first of all in the important towns and cities — by the "nationstate" programme of the Rumanian government and the resulting policy towards minorities, as well as distortions of the statistics. In Slovakia, with the fading of the memory of the shocking events of the late 40s, the number of those who dared to declare themselves Hungarian increased greatly during the 1950s. To this was added a high rate of natural

23

increase, but this growth suddenly dropped from the 1970s on. The greatest Hungarian demographic increases in the Carpathian Basin were registered in the following regions during the period from 1970 to 1980: Beregszász district (12.7%), Hargita and Kovászna counties (respectively 11.7% and 10.5%) and Dunaszerdahely district (18.7%).

An outline of the present ethnic geographic, the demographic and the social situation of the Hungarian minorities in the Carpathian Basin According to the different censuses from the 1990s, the number of ethnic Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin is 13 million, out of which 2.8 million are living outside the borders of the Republic of Hungary. Minority organisations, however, estimate that the number of Hungarians in the area is 3.2 million. This makes up 24.9% of the total number of Hungarians in the Basin. The majority of Hungarians living in a minority are found in Transylvania (1.6 million people), followed by Slovakia with 567,000 people, and Vojvodina in Serbia (339,000). When speaking about the number of Hungarians living in different neighbouring countries, it is worth touching upon the much used term of "ethnical reciprocity". This is very important because the situation of the respective minority in Hungary has played, and still does play, an immense role in the granting of rights for Hungarians in the neighbouring states. As can be seen from Table 5., one can speak about ethnical reciprocity in the case of Hungary only with Croatia, Slovenia and Austria, for only in these cases are their numbers and their demographic and ethno-geographic situations comparable. At the same time, the latest census shows that the Hungarian minorities in Serbia, Rumania and Slovakia are 189, 151, and 54 times greater respectively than their corresponding minorities in Hungary. Apart from the different historical developments of each minority this great disproportionateness makes a comparison between the situation of Hungarians in Slovakia, Rumania and Serbia with that of the Slovaks, Rumanians and Serbians in Hungary impossible. Moreover, this lack of symmetry in number has further increased the vulnerability of Hungarians in Czechoslovakia, Rumania and Yugoslavia. Their political situation has become similar to that of a political hostage during the past 70 years. Although the number of Ruthenians and Ukrainians is very small in Hungary, the lack of balanced ethnical reciprocity does not in any way influence the good relations between the young Ukrainian state and Hungary. What is more, the Ukrainians have realised that in pursuit of an approach to Western Europe, there is a need for a western bridge (Transcarpathia) without ethnic tensions, and for good political and economic relations with Hungary, which can be achieved with the Hungarian minority inside the Ukrainian borders. According to the censuses of around 1990, on the territory of the Carpathian Basin beyond the borders of Hungary, 2,703,176 persons declared themselves to be ethnically Hungarian and 2,773,944 persons were native Hungarian speakers. The numTable 5. Ethnic reciprocity in the countries of the Carpathian Basin (around 1990)

24

Hungarians in Slovakia Hungarians in Ukraine Hungarians in Rumania Hungarians in Serbia Hungarians in Croatia Hungarians in Slovenia Hungarians in Burgenland

567,296 (653,000) 163,111 (210,000) 1,627,021 (2,000,000) 343,942 (365,000) 22,355 (40,000) 8,499 (12,000) 6,763 (7,000)

Slovaks in Hungary Ukrainians in Hungary Rumanians in Hungary Serbs in Hungary Croats in Hungary Slovens in Hungary Germans in West-Hungary

10,459 (80,000) 657 ( .. ) 10,740 (15,000) 2,905 (5,000) 13,570 (40,000) 1,930 (5,000) 1,531 (17,000)

Source: Census data /Ukraine 1989, Hungary 1990, Slovakia, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria 1991, Rumania 1992/ according to the ethnicity (in Austria: every-day language). In parentheses are the estimations – according to the language knowledge and ethnic origin – of the organizations of the minorities and the calculations of K.Kocsis (1988). Hungarians in Transylvania include the Székelyand Csángó-Hungarians.

ber of the latter exceeded that of ethnic Hungarians by 80,500 in Hungary; 40,900 in Slovakia; 15,800 in Transylvania; 11,600 in Transcarpathia, and 5,200 in Vojvodina. The number of native Hungarian speakers surpasses that of ethnic Hungarians almost everywhere, mainly due to the fact that the Gypsy and German populations „Magyarized” their language but have recently undergone a revival of ethnic awareness in areas with a Hungarian majority. Moreover, along the Hungarian language border (e.g. in towns like Pozsony, Kassa, Ungvár and Munkács and in their environs), and in Szatmár County in Rumania this difference had reached between 12 and 48 %. On the other hand, an accelerated lingual assimilation of Hungarians in Slovak, Ruthenian, Serbian and Croatian majority territories means that the number of native Hungarian speakers remains below those of Hungarian ethnic affiliation (e.g. in the overwhelmingly Ruthenian parts of Bereg and Máramaros counties by 14 -27 %, in Croatia by 12 %, in the Transylvanian counties of Szeben, Hunyad, Krassó-Szörény, Beszterce-Naszód - by 5-10 %). The 1980's, decisive in present population trends, found that the number of ethnic Hungarians had decreased by 4.67 % within the borders of Hungary and by 4.57 % beyond them. In Central Eastern Europe the only areas with a growing number of Hungarians were Burgenland (63.1 % growth due to a significant Hungarian influx following the fall of the "iron curtain"), in the Székely Region, and in Slovakia (as a result of the not unfavourable trends in the birth rate, where there was a 2.1 % and 1.39 % growth, respectively). As a consequence of an increasingly unfavourable birthrate and distorted demographic structure of the Hungarian population, the irreversible assimilation of its diaspora, a national revival among the previously „Magyarized” Gypsies and persons of German origin in the new political situation, the number of those declaring themselves to be ethnic Hungarians decreased by 7.6 % in Transylvania (without the Székely Re-

25

gion), and by 11-12 % in Vojvodina, Croatia and the Transmura Region. The macroregional ethnic discrepancy at the expense of Hungarians is indicated by the fact that during the same period there was a 3.2 % to 5.2 % population growth in the neighbouring countries (e.g. 5.2 % in Slovakia, 5 % in Yugoslavia4). In the first half of the 1990’s the negative trends in demography of the Hungarian minorities (decreasing birth rates and increasing mortality rates, a negative balance of migration for political and economic reasons) had led to a drop in the number of Hungarians living in the Carpathian Basin beyond the borders of Hungary, below an estimated 2.6 million by the end of 1995. At the same time ethnic Hungarians within the present territory of Hungary decreased to "a mere" 10 million. The number of people declaring themselves to be ethnic Hungarians living in the neighbouring states and regions at the end of 1995 might have been as follows (in thousands): Slovakia 572, Transcarpathia 154, Transylvania 1,565, Vojvodina 280, Croatia 15, the Transmura Region 7, and Burgenland 7. The losses were especially severe - mainly due to the flight provoked by the Serbo-Croatian War in 1991 - among Hungarians who lived in Croatia (approx. 33 %) and Vojvodina (approx. 17 %). According to the censuses of around 1990, 27.3 % of the 2.7 million persons constituting Hungarian minorities in the Carpathian Basin (722,000 people) live in ethnic blocks along the border with Hungary (South Slovakia, Ung-Bereg-Ugocsa BorderZone in Transcarpathia, Szatmár-North Bihar Zone in Rumania and Tisza Region in Vojvodina); 26.8 % of them (723.000 people) populate the Székely Region in eastern Transylvania (Fig.5.). At the same time, in a chain of towns (an ethnic "contact zone" 5) linking Pozsony-Ungvár-Szabadka, where Hungarians have lost their majority during the past fifty years, they now constitute 13 % (350,000), while the remainder (32.9 %) form language islands or are scattered (858,000). In the 1980’s, there was a 2.1 % increase in the number of Hungarians living in the Székely Region, and a 4.7 % growth rate in the towns in the "contact zone". This can be attributed to a 4.3 % decrease within the neighbouring ethnic blocks and a 13.3 % loss due to the diaspora, i.e. due to migration associated with the trends of urbanisation. The loss from ethnic blocks was the most severe (8.2 %) in the Tisza Region (Vojvodina) as a consequence of a low birthrate and high emigration, and the most moderate (-1.3 %) in southern Slovakia. In spite of this, the towns in the contact zone experienced the highest gain (+17.8 %) during this period, together with southern Slovakia, as a result of migration fed by the relatively favourable demographic trends in the ethnic blocks. Hungarians who are dispersed and who make

4 A relatively significant increase in population of Yugoslavia between 1981 and 1991 was primarily due to the 27.9 % increase of Albanians and 14.6 % increase of Muslimans (Serbian speakers of Islamic faith) of still high fertility. During the same decade the number of Serbs increased by 4.9 %, and that of Montenegrins dropped by 5.1 %. 5 This ethnic "contact zone" includes the following settlements presently with Hungarian minority populations, neighbouring ethnic blocks along the border: Pozsony, Szenc, Diószeg, Galánta, Vágsellye, Érsekújvár, Nagysalló, Léva, Nagykürtös, Losonc, Osgyán, Rimaszombat, Rozsnyó, Jászó, Nagyida, Kassa, Szlovákújhely, Ungvár, Munkács, Nagyszőlős, Szatmárnémeti, Margitta, Nagyvárad, Szabadka.

26

27

Figure 5. Percentage of the Hungarian minorities in the Carpathian Basin (around 1990)

up an ageing group of people suffering from the effects of emigration and growing lingual assimilation diminished by 8-9 % in Slovakia, Transcarpathia and Partium6 and by 16.1 % in Vojvodina. 1.6 million Hungarians (61.5 % of the national minority) are in a favourable position to retain their ethnic identity. This represents an absolute majority (above 50 %), and amounts to 1410 such settlements in the Carpathian Basin. An overwhelming majority of Hungarians in Slovakia, Transcarpathia and the Transmura Region (77.1 %, 71.8 % and 71.9 %, respectively) and slightly more than half of the Hungarians in Transylvania and Vojvodina (56.9 % and 56.1 % resp.) live in such ethnically (for them) favourable environments. However, 54.8 % of Hungarians inhabiting Croatia and 54.2 % of those in Burgenland are trying to preserve their identity in settlements where their proportion does not reach 10 %. The above-mentioned conditions and characteristic features of areas inhabited by Hungarians resulted in the following distribution of settlements with a Hungarian majority in about 1990: Transylvania 786, Slovakia 432, Vojvodina 80, Transcarpathia 78, Transmura Region 23, Croatia 9 and Burgenland 2. From the above it follows that there are considerable differences between conditions in the settlements system in regions of the Carpathian Basin populated by Hungarians. The proportion of those living in settlements with more than 5,000 inhabitants is the highest in Vojvodina (72.9 %), with small and medium-sized towns and large villages, and in Transylvania (57.2 %) which otherwise has extremely diverse conditions. Among Hungarian minorities the proportion of urban dwellers in centres with more than 100,000 inhabitants is also the highest in Transylvania (25.5 %). In Slovakia, Transcarpathia and Vojvodina this proportion reaches 4.6 - 5.6 %. In settlements of less than 1,000 inhabitants, the population faces serious problems in providing an infrastructure and consequently in offering favourable living conditions, and suffers from increasing emigration. This is characteristic of Hungarians in the Slovenian Transmura Region (73.6 %), Croatia (33.9 %), Burgenland (29 %) and Slovakia (22.8 %). Conditions in settlement system are closely connected to the level of urbanisation of Hungarian minorities. So it is not surprising that the proportion of urban dwellers is the largest in Vojvodina and Transylvania (58.7 % and 56.1 %, resp) exceeding the national average (Yugoslavia 45.7 %, Rumania 54.3 %). Although the number of Hungarians inhabiting towns in the Carpathian Basin is on the increase as a whole, the rate of growth has remained far below that of the state-forming nations which is also due to accelerated assimilation. (E.g. figures show +4.2 % growth for Hungarians and +33.9 % for Rumanians in Transylvanian towns between 1977 and 1992; the corresponding data was +0.2 % for Hungarians and +24 % for Ukrainians in Transcarpathian towns between 1979 and 1989). As a result there has been a steady decline in the Hungarian population in the overwhelming majority of towns in neighbouring countries. This trend is particularly striking in big towns with the largest communities of Hungarians (Marosvásárhely, Kolozsvár, Nagyvárad, Szatmárnémeti) (Tab. 6., Fig. 6.).

6 Partium: historico-geographical region denoting West Rumanian counties Arad, Bihar, Szatmár, Szilágy, Máramaros.

28

Table 6. The largest Hungarian communities beyond the borders of Hungary in the Carpathian Basin, according to census data (around 1980 and 1990, thousand persons) Settlements 1. Marosvásárhely / Târgu Mureş R 2. Kolozsvár / Cluj-Napoca R 3. Nagyvárad / Oradea R 4. Szatmárnémeti / Satu Mare R 5. Sepsiszentgyörgy / Sfântu Gheorghe R 6. Szabadka / Subotica Y 7. Székelyudvarhely / Odorheiu Secuiesc R 8. Csíkszereda / Miercurea Ciuc R 9. Temesvár / Timişoara R 10. Brassó / Braşov R 11. Arad / Arad R 12. Nagybánya / Baia Mare R 13. Komárom / Komárno S 14. Pozsony / Bratislava S 15. Kézdivásárhely / Târgu Secuiesc R 16. Dunaszerdahely / Dunajská Streda S 17. Gyergyószentmiklós / Gheorgheni R 18. Zenta / Senta Y 19. Újvidék / Novi Sad Y 20. Beregszász / Berehove U 21. Nagybecskerek / Zrenjanin Y 22. Nagykároly /Carei R 23. Zilah / Zalău R 24. Óbecse / Bečej Y 25. Érsekújvár / Nové Zámky S 26. Nagyszalonta / Salonta R 27. Bácstopolya / Bačka Topola Y 28. Szászrégen / Reghin R 29. Kassa / Košice S 30. Magyarkanizsa / Kanjiža Y 31. Ada / Ada Y

1980 82.2 86.2 75.1 47.6 34.0 44.0 27.7 25.5 36.2 34.0 34.3 25.6 20.0 18.7 13.9 15.1 15.7 18.7 19.2 15.7 16.8 10.4 9.7 14.7 9.4 13.6 12.6 10.9 8.0 10.5 10.3

1990 83.2 74.9 74.2 53.9 50.0 39.7 38.9 38.0 31.8 31.6 29.8 25.9 23.7 20.3 19.4 19.3 18.9 17.9 15.8 15.1 14.3 13.8 13.6 13.5 13.3 12.6 11.2 11.1 10.8 10.2 10.0

Abbreviations: R = Rumania (1977, 1992), S = Slovakia (1980, 1991), Y = Yugoslavia / Serbia (1981, 1991), U = Ukraine (1979, 1989)

Of the 344 towns of the Carpathian Basin located beyond the Hungarian border only 24 showed a modest increase in ethnic Hungarian population during the 1980's. Most of them are small or medium-sized towns (14 in Slovakia and 7 in Transylvania), with a Hungarian-populated hinterland, from where a gradual emigration of the population of nations forming states and a simultaneous immigration of Hungarians modified the ethnic relations favourably for Hungarians7. Hungarians give preference to villages 7 The proportion of ethnic Hungarians showed an increase in the following towns. In

Slovakia (1980-1991): Dunaszerdahely, Nagymegyer, Diószeg, Galánta, Vágsellye, Komárom, Ógyalla, Érsekújvár, Párkány, Ipolyság, Szepsi, Királyhelmec, Nagykapos, Tiszacsernyő; in Transylvania (1977-1992): Székelyudvarhely, Szentegyházas, Gyergyószentmiklós, Tusnádfürdő, Barót, Érmihályfalva, Nagykároly, Segesvár, Erzsébetváros (The two former due to the rapid

29

in the Transmura Region (86.1 %), Croatia (64.2 %), Transcarpathia (62.3 %) and Slovakia (60.5%) offering relatively lower living standards, (and for this reason neglected by other ethnic groups and favourable for preserving the original ethnic structure - compared to towns). Besides emigration and immigration due to sudden changes in the political scene (e.g. in Croatia or Austria), the present demographic structure and situation has been determined by other statistics (birthrate, mortality rate, natural increase and decrease). Demographic parameters of Hungarians living beyond the borders - since it ceded its territories - are basically associated with socio-economic factors, and conditions created by the population policy of the given state. At the same time, changing patterns of natural reproduction of certain groups, rooted in history, still survive. Though there are no detailed ethnic demographic statistics for all the eight countries over the past several decades, and to compile such statistics seems to be unfeasible, partial data show that the decline in the birth rate and a growing mortality rate - or at least its stabilisation - has been a general trend for all the ethnic groups of the Carpathian region. Regretfully, the above demographic parameters show the most unfavourable statistics for ethnic Hungarians. As a result, at the beginning of the 1990's, birth rates for the Hungarian minorities exceeded mortality rates only in southern Slovakia and Transcarpathia, securing a natural increase for their communities for a couple of years, which is today a rarity in areas inhabited by Hungarians. Based on the statistics of Hungarians in Slovakia, Transcarpathia, Transylvania and Vojvodina, the average birth rate of Hungarian minorities in the Carpathian Basin in 1991/92 is even lower (10.2 %) than that of Hungary (12.2 %). Hungarians in Transcarpathia stand out with a birthrate of 15.4 %, surpassing the average of all neighbouring countries. Hungarians in Slovakia show a rate close to that of Hungary (15.4 %), but for those in Transylvania and Vojvodina the birthrate has dropped drastically, down to 9 % and 9.9 %, resp.). The mortality rate of Hungarian minorities (14.3 %) is close to that of Hungary (14.1 %) which is very high in comparison with the average of neighbouring countries, and less favourable than for the total population of Slovakia (10.1%), Transcarpathia (9.4 %) and Transylvania (12 %). Death rates were relatively lower for the Slovakian and Transcarpathian Hungarians (11.1 % and 10.9 %, resp.) with relatively younger populations and it was more severe for those of Vojvodina (19,3 %), abandoned by younger elements of the Hungarian population and now in a disastrous demographic position. Thus, a natural decrease in numbers of Hungarians beyond the borders (-4.1 %) exceeds that within the boundaries of Hungary (-1.9 %). The accelerating natural shrinkage of the population is primarily due to the trends affecting Hungarians in Transylvania (-5.8 %) and Vojvodina (-9.4 %) and can not be counterbalanced even by Transcarpathian (+4.5 %) and Slovakian (+1.5 %) Hungarians who retain their former dynamism of population. One of the most serious problems for Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin is an alarming natural decrease in population (-5.8 % in 1992) as a result of a drastic fall outmigration of Germans.); in Burgenland (1981-1991): Felsőőr (As a result of the dissimilation of part of the formerly Germanised Hungarians and of an immigration from Hungary.).

30

31

Figure 6. The largest Hungarian communities beyond the borders of Hungary (around 1990)

in births and a similar growth in mortality. (In the 1980's natural change was similar to the Slovakian and Transcarpathian-Hungarian trends, approx. +4 %). It should be mentioned however that the Hungarian population of Transylvania is far from uniform as far as demography is concerned. Hungarians of the Székely Region have more positive demographic statistics than both the Hungarians and the whole of Transylvania (natural increase for the Székely Region +3.4 %, for Transylvania +2.7 % in 1990). To compare the above demographic features of Hungarians with other ethnic groups it should be mentioned that by 1992 a natural decrease was typical not only among the Hungarian minorities (-4.1 %) and in Hungary (-1.9 %), but in the Vojvodina province of Serbia (1.8 %), Burgenland in Austria (-1.8 %), in Croatia (-1.1 %) and Transylvania (-0.7 %), and a natural increase in Slovenia had dropped to 0.3 %. At the same time, from the regions bordering Hungary there was considerable natural growth in Transcarpathia (+6.6 %) and Slovakia (+4%). In the latter, however, national and Hungarian averages disguise significant regional disparities which emerged in the 19th century. A traditionally low level of fertility and a severe ageing of population have led to a dominating trend of natural loss in the vicinity of Párkány, Zseliz, Léva, Ipolyság, Nagykürtös and Losonc. Demographic structure according to gender is generally influenced by several factors. As a rule the ageing of a given population, emigration from a region and war casualties diminish the proportion of males, while a higher fertility rate increases it. In the former case this can be attributed to a higher mortality of men, a greater share in the migration process and in war losses, in the latter case, to a surplus of males at birth. According to the 1990 census data the male/female ratio was similar for the Hungarian minorities and for Hungary (93.1 and 92.5 males resp. per 100 females). Apart from the data for Transcarpathia (85.7) still affected by the consequences of World War II, this figure is lower than that for Transylvania (97.1) and for Slovakia (95.3). Of the Hungarian minorities living in the neighbourhood, gender proportions are the most balanced in Slovakia (93.5) and in Transylvania (93.4), while in the case of Hungarian minorities in Croatia (83.4) and the Transmura Region (87.3), particularly affected by the war, they are most distorted. In Transylvania there was a curiosity in Hargita County, where high fertility resulted in a positive male/female ratio in 1992 (100,1 / 100.0). The age distribution of Hungarian minorities, the degree of their ageing - due to both the alarming natural and other demographic and assimilation trends (e.g. low natural reproduction and fertility, accelerating emigration of young people, loss of ethnic self-awareness and lingual assimilation) - is similar to those of the population of the Transmura Region, Vojvodina and Hungary. The proportion of children (up to 14 years old) was between 19.1 - 20.5 % for Hungarians in Hungary, Transylvania and Slovakia, exceeding the ratio of children in Burgenland, Croatia and the Transmura Region with extremely low fertility rates (9.5 %, 11.1 % and 12.1 % resp.). The percentage of elderly people (60 years and over) showed the opposite: Hungarian minorities, and those elderly people living in Hungary were 19.7% and 18.9% respectively. They were surpassed by the ratio of elderly Hungarians in Burgenland, Croatia, the Transmura Region and Vojvodina (44. 7 %, 29.8 %, 26.3 %, 24.1 %, resp.). From the above it follows that a frequently -used demographic parameter, the index of ageing (elderly/100 children) shows

32

balanced average values for the Hungarian minorities as a whole (103.1), the Transmura Region (99.9), Vojvodina (95.1) and Hungary (92.2). The populations of Transcarpathia and Slovakia are quite young (47.9 and 59.6, resp.), while Burgenland’s is rather old (496.6!). Comparing the aggregated index of ageing for Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin (94.4), with that of Yugoslavia (68.7), Rumania (72.2), Slovenia (79) and Ukraine (83.3) the latter indicate a much more favourable age distribution. As a consequence of four decades of socialism with its anticlerical and antireligious policies, the minorities' attitude to religion, the Church and religious identity, especially attitudes of the younger generations who grew up under a totally new political system, underwent a profound change. Hungarians beyond the borders, being minorities, adhered to the Church and religion as symbols of ethnic identity, and were less affected by secularisation than the state forming ethnic groups of the Carpathian Basin. This is proven by the fact that the proportion of those declaring themselves to be atheists (nonreligious) or not responding to the question in the censuses of around 1990, only reached 5.2 % for the Hungarian minorities, while the same value was much higher for Slovakia, Slovenia, Hungary and Austria (27.2 %, 23.5 %, 14.9 %, 12.1 % resp.). Nevertheless, these people without any religious affiliation (an average of 5.2 %) showed considerable disparity with regard to the "index of secularisation", from Transylvanian Hungarians (0.3 %) struggling for survival in an Eastern Orthodox Rumanian environment, to Slovakian Hungarians (19.5 %) with a similar religious structure to state forming nation (Slovaks). The distribution by denomination of Hungarians declaring themselves religious during the last census has been modified by objective and subjective circumstances influencing over the past half of a century ethnic relations (natural change and mobility, socio-political conditions, processes of assimilation, etc.). Presently the religious composition of Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin shows the following pattern: 57.6 % (7.4 million) Roman Catholics, 22.8 % (2.9 million) Reformed (Calvinists), 3.6 % (470 thousand) Lutherans, 2.2 % (290 thousand) Greek Catholics and approx. 13 % (1.7 million) without or with unknown religious affiliation. Compared with the above average values, there are relatively more Roman Catholics and Lutherans among the Hungarians of Hungary, while beyond the borders Calvinists and Unitarians have a higher ratio 8. At the beginning of the 1990’s religious denominations of Hungarian minorities were as follows: 51.8 % Roman Catholics, 34.2 % Calvinists, 2.7 % Unitarians and 2.1 % Greek Catholics. Roman Catholics prevail (65 % to 88 %) among the Hungarians of Vojvodina, the Transmura Region, Burgenland, Croatia and Slovakia. A relative majority of Transylvanian and Transcarpathian Hungarians (47.4 % and 46.9 %, resp.) belong to the Calvinist Church. Communities with a Calvinist majority are to be found in southern Slovakia in the environs of towns like Nagymegyer, Komárom and Zseliz; in the Gömör region they are strongly mixed with Roman Catholics, while they constitute a minor 8 Distribution of the population of Hungary by denomination in 1989: 57.8 % Roman Catholics, 2.2 % Greek Catholics, 19.3 % Reformed, 4.1 % Lutherans, 13.1 non-religious, atheists, with no religious affiliation, etc. (Gesztelyi, T. /ed./ 1991, Egyházak és vallások a mai Magyarországon (Churches and Denominations in Hungary), Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 20. p.)

33

denomination in the Gömör-Torna (Slovakian) Karst Region. Within the other groups of Hungarians along the border, from Nagykapos in Slovakia through to Beregszász in Transcarpathia, and from Szatmárnémeti, and Érmihályfalva up to Nagyszalonta in Rumania, the Calvinist Church is prominent among local Hungarians (in spite of a high number of Roman Catholics living in the valley of the Ung River, and in Szatm r County and of Greek Catholics in the Bereg and Ugocsa regions). Even more Calvinists live among the Hungarians of Szilágyság, Kalotaszeg, Mezőség and in the southwestern part of the Székely Region. In the latter, most religious Hungarians belong to the Calvinist and Unitarian churches along the western and southern margins of Udvarhelyszék. The main bases of the Roman Catholics in Transylvania are in the northern third of the Udvarhelyszék, Gyergyó, Csík, Kászon and Kézdi regions, and there are scattered communities in Bánát, in the environs of Arad. Among the Hungarians of Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia the population is overwhelmingly Roman Catholic. The Calvinist Church has a majority in only 3 - 4 villages9. In spite of the scanty and scarce data available, investigations into the structure of Hungarian families living outside the borders shed light on fertility, natural changes and assimilation phenomena which make it possible to make forecasts for the future. The proportion of incomplete families owing to mortality and divorce is slightly lower in Hungarian families in Transylvania and Slovakia (12.7 % and 13 % resp.) than in those of Hungary (15.5 %). A higher extent of ageing, a lower fertility rate,and the later age of having children has meant the ratio of families without dependent children among the Hungarian minority is higher compared with the national average of not only the neighbouring countries, but of Hungary with its notorious demographic trends: Hungarians in Slovakia (43.6 %), Transylvania (35.6 %), Vojvodina (42.3 %); Slovakia as a whole (39.6 %), Transylvania (32.3 %), Hungary (34.3 %). An overwhelming number of Hungarians in an environment occupied by a majority of the same religious affiliation, similar cultural background and mentality already live in ethnic mixed families. The proportion of these people (married to a person of a different ethnicity and with a different mother tongue) has reached 30.3 % in Slovakia and 42 % in Burgenland. Here, owing to a change to another language of their children, and a loss of their national awareness, there may follow a demographic erosion of the affected ethnic community and put under question its very survival. The social stratification of Hungarian minorities related to their economic activity (work, occupation) shows a correlation with several other factors (e.g. distribution of population by gender, age, educational level - qualifications, skills - physical and social environment of settlements, historical background, and traditions). Nearly half (44 - 49 %) of all women are active earners due to a steady ageing of the population, a growing proportion of those of productive age and an increased proportion of working wom9 The mentioned villages are the following. In Vojvodina (Serbia): Bácsfeketehegy,

Bácskossuthfalva (Ómoravica), Pacsér, in Baranya (Croatia): Kopács, Laskó, Várdaróc, in East Slavonia: Haraszti and in Transmura Region (Slovenia): Szécsiszentlászló, Kisszerdahely, Csekefa. In Croatia the East Slavonian Kórógy and Szentlászló used to be communities with Calvinist Hungarian majority until the flight of their population during the Serbo-Croatian War in 1991.

34

en, formerly working in the home. However, as a result of an alarming decline in natural reproduction, ageing and emigration, a decrease in the number of people of active age in the present grave economic circumstances might involve a drop in the employment level of women and an increased number of forced retirements to avoid unemployment. As a consequence, a rise in the proportion of the non-working population may occur at the expense of Hungarian active earners, putting an increasing burden on them in the near future. The geographic environment and economic background of Hungarians living beyond the borders are to some extent reflected in their occupations and economic groups. Social grouping is following international trends (albeit delayed), and has led from the primary sector (e.g. agriculture) to secondary sectors (e.g. mining, construction, manufacturing), and from secondary sectors to tertiary ones (e.g. commerce, transport and telecommunications, culture and other non-productive activities). Together with the natural environment, the character of the settlement and the economic and regional development policy of the given state, agriculture still plays a relatively significant role in Hungarian communities. The contribution of this sector is especially high in the case of Hungarian minorities in those regions where 60 - 86% of the population live in rural settlements: in Croatia (41.8 %), the Transmura Region (32.1 %), South Slovakia (23.8 %) and Vojvodina (26.7 %), the latter being considered the bread box of Yugoslavia. The average number of people actively engaged in agriculture in the Carpathian Basin varies between 14 and 26 %; with a figure for the Hungarians of Transylvania (16.2 %) showing the maximum. This has resulted in a particularly high involvement of active earners in the secondary (i.e. industrial) sectors (52.7 %) well above the Rumanian average (44.7 %). This can be attributed partly to the hastened industrialisation of Transylvania during the past decades, and partly to the geographical environment of the area of Hungarian settlement. Due mainly to the Székely Region, the Hungarian share in certain branches of light industry (timber processing, furniture making, leather and textile industries) and construction is well above average. The building industry has traditionally been important among Hungarian workers living in peripheral regions, with a scarcity of non-agricultural employment and a high ratio of commuting workers (e.g. South Slovakia, Transcarpathia). The proportion in the tertiary sector - used recently for measuring the level of economic development - remains below national average figures (32 59 %) and those of Hungary (46.5 %) for Hungarian minorities everywhere. In certain categories of employment requiring a high level of skill and qualifications, those belonging to the spheres of education, culture, science and administration, the proportion of Hungarians is below average. For example, in Slovakia where the figure for Slovakians is 1.5% in science and education, it is only 0.5% for Hungarians; in Rumania, where the Rumanian average is 2.4%, it is 1.5%. The level of education and qualifications of Hungarian minorities has developed closely alongside the above trends. Hungarians beyond the state borders are seriously handicapped compared with the majority nations as far as education and qualifications are concerned, which basically influences their marketability and job opportunities. The "knowledge industry" (system of education) which produces human capital and resources is being upgraded all over the world, and this causes a grave situation for the

35

Hungarian minorities in the Carpathian Basin who have not been provided with a modern education system. In certain neighbouring countries there have been (open or disguised) moves to eliminate education in Hungarian, so in some communities the ratio of persons with higher qualifications within the population of over 24 years only reaches a maximum half of the national average: this figure is 4.7 % for Hungarians in both Slovakia and Transylvania, 5.9 % for those of Vojvodina, 10.1 % for Hungary, 9.8 % in Slovakia, 6.9 % in Rumania, and 10.8 % in Yugoslavia. These unfavourable statistics for Hungarian minorities are due to various factors. In the case of Hungarians in Slovakia historical circumstances are responsible (removal and deportation of the Hungarian intelligentsia between 1945 and 1949, a complete elimination of the school system after 1945 and a postponement of Hungarian education till the 1950's etc.) In the case of minorities in Transcarpathia, Transylvania and Vojvodina alarmingly large-scale emigration of Hungarian "human resources" has taken place over the past ten years. A mediating factor in the generally frustrating picture of the educational level is that Hungarian minorities are underrepresented in the lower sections of the "educational pyramid". The rate of illiteracy among Hungarians in Transylvania and Vojvodina (1 % and 2.4 % resp.)10 is well below that the of Rumanians and Serbs (3 % and 4.9 %) in the same regions. The fact that regions with a majority Hungarian population are found not further than 60 - 70 km from the borders, can be regarded in more ways than one. For the Hungarian minority this is favourable, since ethnic identity and the purity of the mother tongue can be best preserved in close proximity to Hungary through permanent — and most of the time exclusive — relations (personal, mass communication, etc.). The advantage to the Hungarian minority, as compared to the Ruthenians, Rumanians or Slovaks who live in the same areas together with them, manifested itself during the last few years in the development of a market economy along the borders, especially in Transcarpathia, Transylvania and Slovakia. This results from their permanent relations with the mother country, and their being bilingual. Through their strong political organisations and parties, Hungarians play an important role in the political life of Slovakia, Transcarpathia, Rumania (Transylvania), and Serbia. In the case of Slovakia, Rumania, and Serbia (Yugoslavia) the existence of frontier zones with a majority Hungarian population can be judged in two ways. From the point of view of the (Slovakian, Rumanian, Serbian) nationalist forces, which are aspiring to create a homogeneous national state, these areas are incredibly dangerous and unstable. They regard them as the "fifth column" of Hungarian irredentism and revanchism, and thus as areas inhabited by the inner enemy. The ethnical loosening up and the homogenisation of these geopolitically dangerous areas is a most urgent mission. According to the other view — as yet not very widespread — these areas will not be the scenes of redrawing the borders or of nationalistic fights in the near future. On the contrary, following the examples of Western Europe, they will be — must be — a means of international integration (based on their bilingual population), and encourage ever-closer 10 Rate of illiteracy is referred to people over 12 years for Hungarians of Transylvania and over 15 years for those of Vojvodina.

36

co-operation between the different national economies. Such tendencies have been observed lately in Slovenia, with its minorities living in Austria and Italy, and even in the Ukraine, along the border with Hungary. In our opinion, the over 3 million European Hungarians who live outside the territory of the Republic of Hungary and are bilingual and bicultural, will play an important role as mediators in political and economic co-operation among the nations in the Carpatho-Pannonian area. Hopefully, this will happen in the not too distant future.

37

Chapter 2

THE HUNGARIANS OF SLOVAKIA

In the Slovak Republic’s most recent census (March 3 rd, 1991) 567,296 people declared themselves to be ethnically Hungarian, while 608,221 said they were Hungarian native speakers. Similar to census data of Hungary and other countries, the abovementioned figure differs from the estimated size of the given ethnic group, or in this case, the number of people claiming and cultivating Hungarian national traditions and culture. In Slovakia, according to ethno-historical, demographic and migration statistics, but not including linguistic assimilation, the estimated number of Hungarian native speakers could well have been 653,000 in 1991in our opinion. This figure corresponds to the population of the Hungarian counties of Győr-Moson-Sopron and Komárom. According to the latest census data, the Hungarian national minority represents 10.7% of Slovakia’s population, 4.4% of the total number of Hungarians in the Carpathian basin and 22.3% of Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin living beyond Hungary’s borders.

THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT The majority of the Hungarian national minority of Slovakia live on the plains (62%). Their settlements can be found along the Danubian (55%) and East-Slovakian (7%) lowlands. With the exception of the alluvial soil alongside larger rivers, the Hungarian-inhabited plains which are almost exclusively used for agriculture are characterised by meadow soil (southern part of Csallóköz1, along the river Dudvág and in Bodrogköz2), and chernozem (northern part of Csallóköz, the regions between VágNyitra and Zsitva-Garam). From the viewpoint of the Carpathian Basin, the Danubian Lowland can be considered as a part of the Little Hungarian Plain (Kisalföld). Its most important rivers are the Danube, Little-Danube and Vág, their floodplains are bordered by groves. The Nyitra, Zsitva and Dudvág considered as tributaries of the Vág, are also worth mentioning. Csallóköz and the territory between the Little Danube and Vág are excellent for agricultural production and play a significant role in the republic’s foodsupply. (Fig. 7.) 1Csallóköz (Slovak: Žitný ostrov, German: Große Schütt-Insel). Region almost exclusively by Hungarians inhabited in Southwest Slovakia between the Danube (Hungarian: Duna, Slovak: Dunaj) and Little Danube (Hungarian: Kis-Duna, Slovak: Malý Dunaj) rivers. 2Bodrogköz (Slovak: Medzibodrožie). Region almost exclusively by Hungarians inhabited in Northeast Hungary and Southeast Slovakia between the Tisza, Bodrog and Latorca rivers.

38

39

Figure 7. Important Hungarian geographical names in South Slovakia

One third of Hungarians inhabit the hills (along the Garam and Ipoly Rivers) and the Ipoly, Losonc, Rima and Kassa basins. In adapting to the hilly environment, the majority of settlements in these regions (Bars, Hont, Nógrád, Gömör and Abaúj) remained in the “small and tiny village” category. This creates special difficulties in supplying communities with fundamental institutions. These hilly regions, covered mostly by brown earth and brown forest soil, contain a few important rivers (Garam, Ipoly, Sajó, Hernád) and streams (Szikince, Kürtös, Rima, Balog, etc.). Only one of out of twenty Hungarians in Slovakia inhabit the highlands. The majority of them live among the rendzina soil covered dolomite and limestone cliffs such as Gömör-Torna (Slovakian) Karst, the Rozsnyó basin, and the Karancs-Medves Region with basalt cones (Somoskő Mt., Ragács Mt., the hill of Béna etc.) in the southern corners of Nógrád and Gömör in Slovakia. The most important water sources of the above-mentioned regions are the Gortva, Torna and Bódva streams.

ETHNIC PROCESSES DURING THE PAST FIVE HUNDRED YEARS By the end of the Middle Age, at the time of the taxation census of 1495, in the territory of the Upper Hungarian counties3 there were at least 413,500 people4, probably 45 % were Slavs5 (Slovaks and Ruthenians) 38 % of them were Hungarians and 17 % Germans (Tab. 7.). Of the counties investigated an absolute majority was formed by Germans in the counties of Pozsony and Szepes and by Hungarians in Gömör, Abaúj, Torna and Zemplén. All of the ten most populous towns which had 1,500 – 4,500 people (Pozsony, Kassa, Nagyszombat, Eperjes, Bártfa, Besztercebánya, Selmecbánya, Lőcse, Késmárk és Körmöcbánya)6 had a German majority, but the Hun garian and Slovak 3 Upper Hungary included the counties of Pozsony, Nyitra, Bars, Hont, Trencsén, Turóc, Árva, Liptó, Zólyom, Gömör, Szepes, Abaúj, Torna, Sáros and Zemplén. 4 Source of national and county data on population at the time of the 1495 census: Kubinyi A. 1996 A Magyar Királyság népessége a 15. század végén (Population of the Kingdom of Hungary at the end of 15th century), Történelmi Szemle XXXVIII. 2-3.pp.135-161. Data on ethnic composition are estimations by the author. 5 According to our estimates the ratio of Hungarians and of Slovaks could be around 38 % each in the area of the counties of Upper Hungary. 6 Population numbers at the turn of the 15 th and 16th centuries: 4,000-5,000: Pozsony, Kassa, about 3,500: Nagyszombat, Eperjes, Bártfa, 3,000: Besztercebánya, 2,500: Selmecbánya, 2,000: Lőcse, 1,500: Körmöcbánya. Sources: Paulinyi, O. 1958 A garamvidéki bányavárosok lakosságának lélekszáma a XVI.sz. derekán (Population of the minig towns of Garam Region (Pohronie) in the middle of 16th century), Történelmi Szemle 1958. 3-4.pp.351-378., Gácsová, A. 1974 Niektoré aspekty počtu majetnosti obyvateľov vychodoslovnských miest v stredoveku (Some aspects of the number of possessions of inhabitants of East Slovakian towns in the Middle Ages) — in: Spišské mestá v stredoveku, VV, Košice, Iványi, B. 1941 ibid., Fügedi, E. 1956 Kaschau, eine osteuropäische Handelstadt am Ende des 15. Jahrhunderts, Studia Slavica II.1-4.pp.185-213., Granasztói Gy.1980 A középkori magyar város (The medieval Hungarian town), Gondolat, Budapest, 157.p., Szabó, I. 1941 A magyarság életrajza (Biography of the Hungarians), Magyar Történelmi Társulat, Budapest,

40

Total population number % 1495 413,500 100 1720 100 1787 1,974,483 100 1840 2,454,223 100 1850 2,262,663 100 1857 2,286,641 100 1869 2,471,739 100 1880 2,458,273 100 1890 2,571,896 100 1900 2,777,663 100 1910 2,904,657 100 1919-20 2,917,204 100 59.5 61.9 58.9 59.7 61.5 60.5 59.1 55.6 63.7

1,459,870 1,401,066 1,346,802 1,474,936 1,512,991 1,555,177 1,642,252 1,613,891 1,859,173

539,083 462,561 672,126 598,180 602,525 673,812 801,897 937,768 758,422

22.0 20.4 29.4 24.2 24.5 26.2 28.9 32.3 26.0

Slovaks number % 186,000 45.0 67.6

Hungarians number % 157,000 38.0 22.9 203,312 113,132 141,603 183,498 80,342 83,906 83,828 90,643 86,105

8.3 5.0 6.2 7.4 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.1 3.0

Ruthenians number %    163,329 160,254 126,110 215,017 241,381 232,220 216,539 198,877 148,954

6.7 7.1 5.5 8.7 9.8 9.0 7.8 6.8 5.1

Germans number % 70,500 17.0 9.5 34,086 88,375 116,490

Jews number

1.73 3.5 5.1

%

0.0 0.5 0.9 1.0 1.2 2.2 2.2

254 9,160 108 21,034 26,781 33,147 63,478 64,550

Others number %

Sources: 1495: Estimation of Kocsis K. based on Fig.9. and Kubinyi A. 1996 A Magyar Királyság népessége a 15. század végén — Történelmi Szemle XXXVIII. 1996. 2-3. pp.135-161., 1720: Acsády I. 1896 Magyarország népessége a Pragmatica Sanctio korában 1720 - 21. — Magyar Statisztikai Közlemények XII. /Új folyam/, Budapest 1787: Danyi D. - Dávid Z. 1960 Az első magyarországi népszámlálás (1784-1787), KSH, Budapest 1840: Fényes E. 1842 Magyarország statistikája I., Pest 1850: Hornyánsky, V. 1858 Geographisches Lexikon des Königreiches Ungarn, G. Heckenast, Pest 1857: Fényes Elek 1867 A Magyar Birodalom nemzetiségei és ezek száma vármegyék és járások szerint, Pest 1869: Keleti K. 1871 Hazánk és népe a közgazdaság és a társadalmi statistika szempontjából, Athenaeum, Pest 1880: A Magyar Korona országaiban az 1881. év elején végrehajtott népszámlálás ...Országos Magyar Királyi Statisztikai Hivatal, Budapest 1882 1890: Jekelfalussy József (szerk.) 1892 A Magyar Korona országainak helységnévtára, Országos M. Kir. Statisztikai Hivatal, Budapest, 1900: A Magyar Korona országainak 1900. évi népszámlálása 1. rész. 1902. A népesség általános leírása községenkint, Magyar Statisztikai Közlemények I., 1910: A Magyar Szent Korona országainak 1910. évi népszámlálása 1. rész. 1912 Magyar Statisztikai Közlemények 42. 1919-20: Soznam miest na Slovensku podľa popisu ľudu z roku 1919., Ministerstvo s plnou mocou pre spravu Slovenska, Bratislava, 1920, Az 1920.évi népszámlálás I. A népesség főbb demográfiai adatai .. 1923, Magyar Kir. Központi Statisztikai Hivatal, Budapest Remarks: Upper Hungary = Territory of Pozsony, Nyitra, Bars, Hont, Trencsén, Turóc, Árva, Liptó, Zólyom, Gömör-Kis-Hont, Szepes, Abaúj-Torna, Sáros, Zemplén Counties (1914). Slovaks include Ruthenians in 1495 and in 1720.

Year

Table 7. Ethnic structure of the population of Upper Hungary (1495 - 1919)

minorities were numerous. Apart from the above-mentioned towns the German ethnic region extended to the area situated between the German towns of Somorja–Szenc– Nagyszombat and the Little Carpathians and to the northern and southern foreland of Pozsony (Fig. 8.). The German (Saxon) ethnic area also included most of Szepes County, but they had been increasingly losing ground to both the Goral-Polish ethnic group and Ruthenians in the northern areas (Szepesi Magura, Dunajec), and to Slovaks in the Hernád Valley and in a strip along the Poprád-Lőcse-Szepesvár main road. Beside the Szepes and Pozsony German ethnic blocks there were a number of ethnic pockets of Germans in the counties of Sáros (Eperjes, Bártfa, Kisszeben), Abaúj (Kassa, Abaújszina, Szepsi), North Gömör (Rozsnyó, Dobsina, Csetnek, Alsósajó) and in present-day Central Slovakia (Besztercebánya, Zólyom, Korpona, Selmecbánya, Újbánya, Körmöcbánya, Nyitrapróna and their surroundings). In this period the northern "boundary" of the Hungarian ethnic area (more precisely a Hungarian-Slovak, or in some places a Hungarian-German contact zone) had stabilised along the line stretching between Somorja-Nagyszombat-Galgóc-Nyitra-LévaLosonc-Rimaszombat-Rozsnyó-Jászó-Kassa-Gálszécs-Nagymihály. It could by no means be considered a rigid ethnic bundary, for sizeable Hungarian and Slovak minorities lived north and south of this line, especially in the central areas of Nyitra, Hont, and Zemplén7 counties. Similar to the Slovaks, most of the Hungarians of Upper Hungary were rural dwellers at the end of the 15th century. They formed significant urban blocks only due to their penetration of towns founded by Germans (e.g. Eperjes, Kassa, Korpona, Bélabánya, Nyitra, Galgóc, Nagyszombat, Pozsony). Within the area of Hungarian settlement – besides the above-mentioned market towns – only the Hungarians in Komárom had a sizeable population. At that time the Slovak ethnic area extended mainly to the inter-mountain basins, river valleys and the southern foreland of the Western Carpathians. The mountain regions of Árva and North Trencsén, the High and Low Tatras and Gömör-Szepes (today Slovak) Ore Mountains were uninhabited dense woodland. Along the northeastern borderland, on the northern periphery of Zemplén and Sáros counties and in the marginal areas of Szepes and Gömör a gradually expanding ethnic area of Ruthenians pursuing a pastoral way of life was being established. The victory of the Ottoman Turks at Mohács (1526) not only signalled the fall of the Hungarian Kingdom considered at that time to be a middle-sized European power, but initiated a profound transformation in the ethnic patterns in the southern and central areas of the country. Military operations and destruction had soon reached territories now belonging to Slovakia (1529, 1543)8. Even prior to this, a massive flight of Hunga-

7 Bakács, I. 1971 I. 1971 Hont vármegye Mohács előtt (Hont County before 1526), Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest,33.p., Kniezsa I. 1941 Adalékok a magyar-szlovák nyelvhatár történetéhez (Contributions to the history of the Hungarian-Slovak ethnic boundary), Budapest, pp.18-24.,51-52. 8 Mainly after the Ottoman campaign against Vienna in 1529 and after the fall of Esztergom (1543), the centre of the Hungarian Catholic Church.

42

43

Figure 8. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of Slovakia (late 15 th century) Main sources: Bakács I. 1971 Hont vármegye Mohács előtt, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Fekete Nagy A. 1934 A Szepe sség területi és társadalmi kialakulása, Budapest, Fügedi E. 1938 Nyitra megye betelepülése, Budapest, Ila B. 1976, 1944, 1946, 1968 Gömör megye I -IV., MTA, Budapest, Kniezsa I. 1941 Adalékok a magyar-szlovák nyelvhatár történetéhez, Athenaeum, Budapest, Marsina, R. - Kušík, M. 1959 Urbáre feudálnych panstiev na Slovensku I., Vydavateľstvo SAV, Bratislava, Varsik, B. 1964, 1973, 1977 Osídlenie Košickej kotliny I-III., SAV, Bratislava, Varsik, B. 1984 Nemecká kolonizácia na území bratislavskej stolice v 13.-14. storočí — in: Varsik, B. 1984 Z osídlenia západného Slovenska v stredoveku, Veda, Bratislava, Vlastivedný slovník obcí na Slovensku I-III. Veda, Bratislava, 1977-1978

rians and Croats9 had started. Refugees from Croatian-Slavonian territories occupied by the Turks inhabited nearly 20 villages, primarily around Pozsony and Nagyszombat10, from where the German population had perished or escaped between 1529 and 1553, due to the destruction and intimidation of the Ottoman and Habsburg troops. These depopulated German villages became repopulated not only by Croats but by Slovaks (in the vicinity of Nagyszombat, Bazin, Modor) and Hungarians (e.g. in Pozsonyivánka, Cseklész, Éberhard, Szenc and Németgurab). In this period, particularly following the surrender of Esztergom (1543) a massive move of Hungarians started to Nagyszombat, to where the seat of the Hungarian Roman Catholic archbishop was transferred. As a result,until the beginning of the 18th century this town became a settlement with a relative Hungarian majority . Between 1543 and 1575, after the surrender of fortresses and castles which had protected the counties of Komárom, Esztergom, Bars, Hont, Nógrád and Gömör against the Turks11 large numbers of Hungarians12 fled the river valleys and hill regions, depopulating these areas. This followed the war losses, the carrying off of some of the population, the heavy burden of taxation, and a lack of both personal security and that of their property. As a consequence, between 1495 and 1598 the population of counties such as Komárom, Hont and Gömör had dropped by one third. The number of existing settlements between the mid-15th century and 1598 in the present-day Slovakian counties of Komárom and Esztergom decreased from 106 to 55, and between 1427 and 1572 in Gömör County the number fell from 340 to 213 13. Apart from the destruction caused by warfare, in these borderland areas between the Habsburg Empire and the Ottoman Empire a doubling of taxation (imposed on the population by Habsburg-Hungarians and Ottoman-Turks) also contributed to accelerating depopulation and to the large-scale exodus of predominantly Hungarian and to a lesser extent, Slovak serfs. Owing to Hungarians fleeing northwards and a Hungarian majority prevailing within the outskirts of towns in the second half of the 16 th century, there was an intensifying ”Magyarization” of towns with a German character such as Kassa, Eperjes, Szepsi and Rozsnyó. At the same time, in towns situated far away from the Hungarian ethnic areas the proportion of Hungarians (mainly arriving as refugees) within the local population, which was predominantly Slovak and German, was relative-

9 Refugees from Croatia first appeared in present-day Slovakia in 1529. (Ritig-Beljak, N. 1986 Gradišćanski hrvati Croats of Burgenland - in: Enciklopedije Jugoslavije 4., Zagreb, 485.p. 10 The villages repopulated by Croats: e.g. Horvátjárfalu, Dunacsún, Oroszvár, Lamacs, Pozsonyhidegkút, Dévényújfalu, Mászt, Zohor, Németbél, Horvátgurab, Nagysenkőc, Kárpáthalas, Felsőhosszúfalu, Nahács, Selpőc. 11 e.g. Esztergom (1543), Ság, Drégely, Gyarmat, Szécsény (1552), Salgó, Fülek (1554), Ajnácskő (1566), Divény (1575). 12 Csapodi Cs. 1942 Bars megye Verebélyi járásának nemzetiségi viszonyai az újkorban (Ethnic structure of the District of Verebély -Vráble of Bars County in the New Age), Magyar Történettudományi Intézet, Budapest, Ila B. 1976 Gömör megye (Gömör County) I., Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 13 Žudel, J. 1984 Stolice na Slovensku (Counties in Slovakia), Obzor, Bratislava, 70., 107.p., Ila, B. 1976 ibid. 266.p.

44

ly high e.g.14 Sztropkó 35.7 %, (1569), Garamszentkereszt 26 % (1573), Bát 36 % (1664), Bakabánya 32 % (1664), Nagytapolcsány 21 % (1664). On the other hand, in Hungarian towns situated within the Hungarian-Slovak ethnic contact zone, which was particularly prone to the destruction caused by military operations, the proportion of Hungarians (or at least taxpayers bearing a Hungarian name) dropped considerably during the 16th and 17th centuries owing to a massive resettlement of Slovaks from the surroundings: Léva 72 % (1554), Losonc 63 % (1596), Rimaszombat 82 % (1596), Tőketerebes 69 % (1601) and Gálszécs 83 % (1601) 15. In the 16th and 17th centuries i.e. at the time of military campaigns16 especially affecting southern areas of the present-day Slovakia which were inhabited by Hungarians, high intensity colonisation took place in the more protected mountain regions. Slavs pursuing a pastoral lifestyle settled here who had a Vlach right. The number of these settlements reached 20017 by the end of the 17th century. This colonisation by GoralPoles and Slovaks was especially typical in the counties of Árva, Trencsén, Liptó and Szepes18. In this colonisation with its Vlach right system Ruthenians only formed a minority in the 17th century while Slovaks retreated to the mostly uninhabited alpine meadows and mountain woodlands which provided security in time of war 19. Starting in the 16th century the area of Slovak settlement expanded, not only with the colonisation of Vlach shepherds, but also with the formation of many scattered settlements (for example: in Slovak "kopanice, rale, štále, lazy, samoty") in the mountains - called "kopaničiarska kolonizácia" in Slovakian. These were particularly in the Trencsén (e.g. White Carpathians) and Nyitra counties (e.g. Miava Hills) and along the boundary between Zólyom and Nógrád (e.g. in the vicinity of Gyetva) 20. This latter process resulted in an abundance of scattered mountain settlements colonised by Slovak farmers who had escaped from areas affected by war (mainly by the Turks), who were seeking areas to cultivate. In the western region, a gradual shrinking of the German ethnic area and its Slovakisation was somewhat counterbalanced by the massive settlement of German-

14

Marsina, R. - Kušík, M. 1959 Urbáre feudálnych panstiev na Slovensku (Urbars of the feudal estates in Slovakia) I-II., SAV, Bratislava 15 After Marsina, R. - Kušík, M. 1959 ibid. 16 E.g. the 15 and 30 years wars (1593-1606, 1619-1645), a military campaign of the Turks in 1663-64, a struggle led by Prince I. Thököly (a vassal of the Ottoman Empire) against the Habsburgs (1682-1685). 17 Verešík, J. 1974 Osídlenie Slovenska (Settlement of Slovakia) - in: Slovensko, Ľud - I. Časť, Obzor, Bratislava, 460.p. 18 A 16-17th century expansion of Gorals was especially typical in the northern margin counties of Trencsén, Árva and Szepes. However, in the 16 th century on the estates of the Zápolya and Podmaniczky families (e.g. around Trencsén, Ilava, Kasza, Zsolnalitva, Lednic, Ugróc) most of the Vlachs were considered Slovaks (Ratkoš, P. 1984 Rozvoj valašského ovčiarstva a jeho prírodné podmienky v 14.-17. storočí (Development of Vlach shepherdship and its natural conditions), Nové obzory 26., 142.p.). 19 Ila B. 1976 ibid. 320.p. 20 Verešík, J. 1974 ibid. pp. 467-469.

45

speaking Habans21 in the mid-16th century in the vicinity of Szakolca in Nyitra County (e.g. Ószombat, Gázlós, Holics, Sasvár, Szentistvánfalva and Kátó). In the course of the counter-reformation (the re-catholisation of the 17th century), most of them were expelled, and the rest gradually underwent Slovakisation. Between 1495 and 1598 due to the migration of Slovaks, Hungarians and Gorals mentioned above and relatively low war losses, the population increased for the counties of Árva (+200 %), Sáros (+ 127.9 %), Nyitra and Trencsén (both 110 %) 22. In the period between 1598 and 1640 – chiefly during the 15 and 30 year wars – when the total population of the Upper Hungarian counties dropped from 644 thousand to 608 thousand (-5.6 %), the above-mentioned colonisation by Slavs continued (Vlachs i.e. Slovaks, Ruthenians, Gorals) in the relatively protected environment of the mountains. As a result, the population increased by 27.7 %, to 249 thousand in the counties of Trencsén, Zólyom, Árva, Szepes and Zemplén with their Slavic ethnic majority, which offered a fairly protected environment. In the second half of the 17th century, after the surrender of the Érsekújvár fortress (1663), most of the Hungarian ethnic area north of the Danube captured by the Turks became a terrain for military operations until 1685. In spite of a massive exodus, and the carrying off and killing of the Hungarian population, by the 1664 Turkish tax census of the Érsekújvár eyalet (province)23, most people liable to taxation living in the heavily depopulated area between the Danube and the hilly region were Hungarians (roughly up to the Galgóc - Appony - Lédec - Léva - Palást line). The most populous towns with 95-100 % Hungarians were Nagysalló, Verebély, Szőgyén, Sempte and Komját (with 411–127 taxpayers)24. Despite wars and epidemics, the Hungarian ethnic block maintained its previously solid extension of the 15th and 16th centuries in the eastern part of Upper Hungary. Moreover, on the basis of the analysis of surnames, of the 676 registered burgers living in the present-day city of Kassa in East Slovakia, which had had a German ethnic majority until the mid-16th century, 72.5 % may have been

21 Habáns: Anabaptist religious community, the members of which escaped from Switzerland through Austria and Moravia and settled in Upper Hungary after 1547. During the counterreformation of the 17th century the majority fled to Transylvania, then abroad. Among the Habáns there were especially skilled artisans and those who produced faiance ceramics. 22 For the same period the combined population of the West Hungarian counties of Vas and Sopron received many refugees, German and Croatian colonists, increased by a mere 42.9 %. (Kubinyi A. 1996 ibid. pp.135-161., Bakács I. 1963 A török hódoltság korának népessége (Population of the Hungarian territories under Ottoman-Turkish authority)— in: Kovacsics J. (Ed.) Magyarország történeti demográfiája, Budapest, 129.p. 23 Blaskovics J. 1989 Érsekújvár és vidéke a török hódoltság korában (Érsekújvár and its environs in the time of the Turkish occupation), Állami Gorkij Könyvtár, Budapest, 841p. 24 Nyitra, Léva towns of Hungarian ethnic majority and taken back from the Ottomans in 1664 did not figure in the Turkish tax statistics (defter). At that time Érsekújvár as the most important fortress of the region accommodated mainly moslem garrison troops (Bosnians, Turks). At the same time of 583 heads of household paying tax in Galgóc 48.9 % were Slovaks, 4,1 % Germans and 47 % Hungarians.

46

Hungarian, 13.2 % German and 14.3 % Slovak or of uncertain origin (1650) 25. Starting with the second half of the 17th century, the Turkish campaigns, incursions and wars of independence led by princes I. Thököly (1682 -1685) and F. Rákóczi II. (1703-1711) were a serious blow to Hungarian ethnic blocks almost everywhere in Upper Hungary26. Conditions were created for the spontaneous movement or settlement in places abandoned by Hungarians of the large population of Slovaks from the mountains. This was also instigated by the landowners. Following the failure of the war of independence led by F. Rákóczi II., the territory of the Hungarian Kingdom lay in ruins (and the Carpathian Basin in general). There was a movement to restore a balance between the relatively overpopulated northern and western peripheries and the depopulated central and southern regions. This was controlled by the geographic distribution of fertile land which was to be cultivated and resulted in a massive southward migration of Hungarians and Slovaks. There had been a movement of Slovaks (and some Ruthenians) in increasing numbers from the mountainous regions which had provided shelter during wars and epidemics to the areas where Hungarians had died or emigrated. At the beginning of this enormous migration, tax censuses were taking place in 1715 and 172027. During the first 69,704 households paying tax on the territory of present-day Slovakia were registered, and 61,084 such households were recorded in the counties of Upper Hungary. Although I. Acsády (1896) and his colleagues were often mistaken in their population estimations and their ethnic composition 28, in the case of Upper Hungary their calculations seem to have been quite reliable: 67.6 % Slavs, 22.9 % Hungarians, 17 % Germans and 2 % others. In 1720 of the 63 largest towns on the territory of present-day Slovakia with at least 100 taxpaying households 40 had a Slovak majority, 14 a German and 9 a Hungarian majority29. The greatest number of taxpaying households were registered among Hungarians in Komárom (657), Rimaszombat (228), Kassa (205), Léva (191) and Rozsnyó (180), and of Slovaks in Szakolca (430), Selmecbánya (424), Besztercebánya (211) and Ótura (202), and of Germans in Pozsony (704), Körmöcbánya (584), Selmecbánya (360), Lőcse (338) and Késmárk (268). A picture of the rapidly-changing rural ethnic pattern in the first half of the 18 th century, 25 Kerekes L. 1940 Polgári társadalmunk a XVII. században (Our civil society in 17 th century - Košice), Kassa, pp.49-57. The population of Kassa in 1661 according to Evlia Cselebi, the famous Turkish traveller was composed by "...Hungarians, Germans, Upper Hungarians…" (Slovaks? comment by the author). See Karácson I. (Ed.) 1904 Evlia Cselebi török világutazó magyarországi utazásai (Travels of the Turkish world traveller, Evlia Chelebi in Hungary) 1660-1664, MTA, Budapest, 102.p. 26 Kniezsa I. 1941 ibid. 29., 54.p., Csapodi Cs. 1942 ibid. 21.p. 27 Acsády I. 1896 Magyarország népessége a Pragmatica Sanctio korában (Population of Hungary in 1720-21), Magyar Statisztikai Közlemények XII. Budapest, 288p. 28 Petrov, A. 1928 Příspěvky k historické demografii Slovenska v XVIII.-XIX. století (Contributions to the historical demography of Slovakia in 18 th - 19th centuries), Praha, pp.57-59., Dávid Z. 1957 Az 1715.-20. évi összeírás (The census of 1715-1720) - in: Kovacsics J. (Ed.) A történeti statisztika forrásai, Közgazdasági és Jogi Könyvkiadó, Budapest, pp.145-199. 29 Towns of Hungarian ethnic majority in 1720: Somorja, Komárom, Udvard, Nyitra, Érsekújvár, Léva, Rimaszombat, Rozsnyó, Kassa.

47

together with intense migration and mobility – as regards the Hungarian-Slovak relationship - was attempted by M. Bél30. The Slovak-Hungarian ethnic boundary had, from the second half of the 17th century, extended to the mountain foreland. As a result of the accelerated southward migration of Slovaks deep into the flatland, in the first half of the 18th century the border had stabilised along the line of towns with a Hungarian ethnic majority: Pozsonypüspöki-Cseklész-Szenc-Szered-Nyitra-Léva-Losonc-RimaszombatSajógömör-Pelsőc-Rozsnyó-Jászó-Szepsi-Nagyida-Zemplén-Nagykapos.31 In an unpopulated area between Érsekújvár-Nyitra-Léva, including the estate at Surány, a large Slovakian ethnic pocket had formed by the second half of the 17 th century. This came as a result of resettlement encouraged by landowners32. Along the periphery (mainly in the environs of Verebély, Léva, Nagysalló), due to the mixture of Hungarians and Slovaks (mixed marriages, everyday communication) the local population became bilingual and with two cultural identities. War losses, the southward migration and linguistic assimilation of Hungarians to Slovaks, caused the destruction of the Hungarian "ethnic corridor" along the Hernád and Tarca valleys. Mainly due to this the earlier Hungarian ethnic block near Eperjes had shrunk by the early 18th century to three main ethnic pockets (Eperjes-NagysárosPécsújfalu – Nagyszilva - Kapi; Somos - Radács; Girált – Cselfalva - MagyarraszlavicaMargonya). It had disappeared virtually without any trace by the middle of the same century. After the Hungarians who were scattered in the counties of Sáros, Abaúj, Zemplén and Ung had been Slovakized, the Hungarian-Slovak ethnic border retreated to the Jászó – Nagyida – Abaújszina – Hernádtihany – Magyarbőd – Szilvásújfalu – Hardicsa – Deregnyő – Pálóc - Ungvár line. In this vicinity – especially in Kassa and to the east, between Gálszécs, Tőketerebes and Sátoraljaújhely – an extremely mixed, Hungarian-Slovak bilingual population with an uncertain ethnic identity had come into being, similar to the situation in the above-mentioned Érsekújvár – Nyitra – Verebély - Léva area. By the end of the 18th century regions formerly underpopulated, and thus presenting economically attractive areas had reduced in number through repopulation and the mobility of the population had been curbed, thus the ethnic stability had grown. At about the time of the first population census in Hungary (1784-1787) the ethnic pattern

30 Bel, M. Notitia Hungariae novae historico geographica. See Petrov, A. 1928 ibid., Žudel, J. 1992 Národnostná štruktúra obyvateľstva na južnom Slovensku v 1. polovici 18. storočia (Ethnic structure of the population in South Slovakia in the first half of 18th century), Geografický Časopis 44. 2. pp. 140-148. 31 Žudel, J. 1992 ibid. 32 Kniezsa I. 1941 ibid. pp. 29-32. To the Surány estate being a property of the counts Kaunitz between 1701 and 1730 a great number of peasants from Moravia were settled as well (e.g. Tótmegyer, Nagysurány, Bánkeszi, Zsitvafödémes, Özdöge, Malomszeg). Károlyi L. 1911 A gróf Károlyi-család összes jószágainak birtoklási története (History of the whole properties of Count Károlyi Family), Budapest, 323 p.

48

in the present-day territory of Slovakia – based upon contemporary sources33 – can be outlined as follows (Fig. 9.). Compared with the first half of the 18th century the position of the Hungarian-Slovak ethnic border had not much changed, apart from the dissolution and Slovakization of the Hungarian ethnic block at Eperjes. Comparing the data of M. Bél, the Lexicon.., J.M. Korabinszky and A. Vályi it can be stated that the Slovakization of Hungarian villages34 along the Hungarian-Slovak ethnic contact zone and the appearance of additional pockets of Slovaks35 and Ruthenians36 were ethnic processes worth mentioning during the 18th century. The Ruthenians progressively penetrating from Polish and Ukrainian areas beyond the Carpathians since the 13th century, had created a settlement area of considerable size by the 18th century. This was primarily in the Lower Beskids, Lőcse Mountains and Pieniny under the aegis of the so-called colonisation of Vlach rights. Besides these areas, they lived in great numbers in the Eperjes (Szalánci-) Mountains and on the plains of Zemplén and Ung counties. Those living in the latter two later merged with the surrounding Slovaks and Hungarians37 in the following centuries. Their lingual assimilation with Slovaks and Hungarians was fostered by the fact that the Ruthenians moving in were cotters and had been eager to be accepted by the Hungarian and Slovak majority, i.e. by people of a higher social status38. According to a census conducted in 1773 the number of small villages with a Ruthenian majority dotted about in present-day Eastern Slovakia had reached 30339. By the same time (second half of the 18th century) Ruthenians of Vlach rights who lived in Central Slovakia, e.g. in North Gömör, had turned into Slovaks; this process was accelerated by the conversion of Ruthenians to being Catholics of the Byzantine rite i.e. Greek Catholics40 (Union of Ungvár, 1646). Their mutual (Roman Catholic) religion, and aspirations to belong to a society of a higher level also accelerated the assimilation of the Goral-Polish population of Vlach rights in northern parts of Szepes and Trencsén counties. Owing to their economic inferiority and the 33

Lexicon locorum Regni Hungariae populosorum anno 1773 officiose confectum, Magyar Békeküldöttség, Budapest, 1920, 335p., Korabinszky, J. M. 1804 Atlas Regni Hungariae portatilis, Wien, 60p., Vályi A. 1796 - 1799 Magyar országnak leírása I - III., Buda, 702p., 736p., 688p. 34 E.g. Pozsonyivánka, Pusztafödémes, Cifer, Vágmagyarád, Nagysúr, Hódi, Vágpatta, Nyitraújlak, Assakürt, Óbars, Alsózellő, Osgyán, Kőhegy, Meleghegy, Pólyi, Szaláncújváros (Kniezsa I. 1941 ibid. 29., 55.p.). 35 E.g. Deménd, Százd, Dobóca, Gömörhosszúszó, 36 E.g. Kisdobra, Bodrogmező-Polyán, Bodrogszerdahely. 37 Petrov, A. 1923 Kdy vznikly ruské osady na uherské Dolní zemí a vůbec za Karpaty ? (When were the Ruthenian settlements in the Great Hungarian Plain and in the Carpathians founded ?), Český Časopis historický XXIX. 3-4. 38 Udvari I. 1990 XVIII. századi történeti-demográfiai adatok Északkelet-Magyarország görögkatolikus népességéről (Historic-demographic data about the Greek Catholics of NortheastHungary in the 18th century) - in: Udvari I. (Ed.) A munkácsi görögkatolikus püspökség lelkészségeinek 1806. évi összeírása, Vasvári Pál Társaság Füzetei 3., Nyíregyháza, 8.p. 39 Petrov, A. 1924 Národopisná mapa Uher podle úředního lexikonu osad z roku 1773 (Ethnic map of Hungary based on the lexicon of settlements of 1773), ČAVU, Praha, pp.34-35. 40 Podhradszky Gy. 1924 A tótoklakta Felföld politikai és kultúrgeográfiája (Political and cultural geography of Upper Hungary inhabited by Slovaks), Studium, Budapest, 27.p.

49

50 Figure 9. Ethnic map of the present-day territory of Slovakia (late 18 th century) Sources: Korabinszky, J. M. 1804 Atlas Regni Hungariae portatilis, Wien, 60p., Lexicon locorum Regni Hungariae populosorum anno 1773 officiose confectum, Magyar Békeküldöttség, Budapest, 1920, Vályi A. 1796 - 1799 Magyar országnak leírása I - III., Buda

strong pressure of the Slovakian church and of the Slovakian language they had hardly any Polish identity41, but they were still registered as being of Polish ethnicity in the northwestern part of Árva County in 1773. As a result of a peaceful Slovak expansion dating back to the medieval period, many areas with a German ethnic majority in the early 18th century had turned into those with a Slovak majority e.g. in towns (Bazin, Modor, Szentgyörgy and Újbánya), and in the Szepesség-Zips region (Hernád valley). In the towns of the region where rapid Slovakization was taking place between the Vág valley (Liptó County) and the HernádTarca valley (Abaúj and Sáros counties), i.e. in Lőcse, Igló and Szepesváralja, the descendants of the medieval Saxon settlers became a minority by the turn of the 18 th and 19th centuries. In the environs of Pozsony and Nagyszombat most of the Croats who settled there in the mid-16th century had become Slovaks by the end of the 18 th century,42 owing to a lack of ethnic replacement, a diaspora, the fact that their language was closely related to Slovakian and their common (Roman Catholic) religion. The Jewish population, following discriminative measures taken at the end of the Middle Ages and the destruction of war in the 16th and 17th centuries, had begun to settle in Upper Hungary starting at the end of the 17th century. Parallel with the persecution of the Jews in Bohemia and Moravia in the first half of the 18 th century, they moved increasingly into the western counties (Pozsony, Nyitra and Trencsén), though there had been a sizeable resettlement from the territory of Polish Galicia to the eastern counties (Zemplén, Abaúj, Sáros)43. The number of Jews in the counties of Upper Hungary – according to the 1787 census – had risen to 34, 086; 61,3 % of them lived in the western counties, while 34,2 % were resident in the eastern counties already mentioned. At the time of the 1787 census44 ethnic-religious affiliation was asked only of the Jews, so that the linguistic-ethnic composition of the 1,974,483 people living in Upper Hungary is not known exactly. However, on the basis of the distribution of serfs' declarations (fassios) by language in the course of regulating the tenements held by

41

Podhradszky Gy. 1924 ibid. 25.p. Settlements with Croatian majority around 1796: Horvátjárfalu, Dunacsún, Dévényújfalu, Lamacs, Horvátgurab and Nahács. 43 Beluszky P. 1996 A zsidó lakosság területi elterjedésének néhány jellemzője a két világháború közötti Magyarországon (Some characteristic of spatial distribution of Jews in Hungary in the interwar period) - in: Dövényi Z. (Ed.) Tér, gazdaság, társadalom, MTA Földrajztudományi Kutató Intézet, 319.p. 44 Danyi D. - Dávid Z. 1960 Az első magyarországi népszámlálás (The first Hungarian census) (1784-1787), KSH, Budapest 42

51

socage45 between 1767 and 1771, the ratio of Hungarians in Upper Hungary is assumed to have been 22.9 %46. The first ethnic data of the whole nation by county was published by E. Fényes in 184247. According to this survey the total population of the counties in Upper Hungary exceeded 2.4 million, with the following ethnic distribution: 59.5 % Slovaks, 22 % Hungarians, 8.3 % Ruthenians, 6.7 % Germans and 3.6 % Jews. Ethnic proportions – apart from a slow homogeneization of the Slovak and Hungarian settlement area at the expense of the foreign diaspora – did not show any fundamental change as compared to the end of the 18th century with the exception of a sizeable influx of Jews from Galicia (Tab. 7. ). According to the Austrian census of 185048 in the combined area of the counties concerned the proportion of Slovaks had grown from 59. 5 % to 61. 9 % between 1840 and 1850 at the expense of Ruthenians (in Zemplén and Sáros), of Germans (in Szepes) and of Hungarians (in Abaúj, Gömör, Hont and Nyitra). In the period between the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867 which signalled the political emancipation of Hungarians, and the 1880 census, no significant change occurred in the ethnic spatial pattern. In 1880 in Upper Hungary and in the present-day territory of Slovakia49 the distribution of the 2.4 million population by native language was the following: 61.5 % (61.1 %) Slovaks, 24.5 % (22.2 %) Hungarians, 9.8 % (9.3 %) Germans and 3.3 % (3.2 %) Ruthenians (Tables 7., 8.). By this period a trend towards southward migration which had led to a spatially balanced population had virtually ended, affected by the territorial distribution of population and the means of production (chiefly of the fertile land) together with the southward retreat of the SlovakianHungarian language boundary. At that time the Hungarian-Slovakian ethnic border stretched along the Pozsony-Galánta-Érsekújvár-Nyitra-Léva-Losonc-Rozsnyó-JászóSátoraljaújhely-Ungvár line. According to available data, the Slovakization of Greek Catholic Ruthenians had accelerated between 1840 and 1880; their number had dropped from 203 thousand to 80 thousand, i.e. from 8.3 % down to 3.3 %. People declaring themselves to be Ruthenian gradually became typical of the woodland areas in the Carpathians. Slovakian cultural expansion within the Roman Catholic church exerted pressure on the Polish Gorals who uniformly declared themselves to be Slovaks in 1880. 45 Urbarial regulation: Regulation of the size of the tenement held by socage and of serf's services on the basis of the urbarial decree (1767) of empress Maria Theresia. See Felhő I. 1957 Data gathered in the course of the Theresian urbarial regulation - in: Kovacsics J. (Ed.) A történeti statisztika forrásai, Közgazdasági és Jogi Kiadó, Budapest, pp.454-455. 46 Udvari I. 1996 A Mária Terézia korabeli úrbérrendezés szlovák nyelvű kéziratos forrásai (Manuscript sources of the urbarial regulation in Slovakian in the time of empress Maria Theresia), Vasvári Pál Társaság Füzetei 15., Nyíregyháza, 16.p. 47 Fényes E. 1842 Magyarország statistikája (Statistics of Hungary) I., Pest 48 Hornyánsky, V. 1858 Geographisches Lexikon des Königreiches Ungarn, G. Heckenast, Pest 49 Žudel, J. 1993 Národnostná štruktúra obyvateľstva Slovenska roku 1880 (Ethnic structure of the population of Slovakia in 1880), Geografický Časopis 45. 1. pp.3-17.

52

The area of German settlement had remained basically unchanged: Pozsony and its surroundings, marginal areas of the Privigye district, Körmöcbánya and the Szepesség (Poprád valley and the southern part of the Igló district). In most of their medieval towns, they had however become a minority by 1880. In the Slovakian and Ruthenian territories of West and East Slovakia there lived a sizeable population of German native-speakers (5-24 %), most of whom consisted of Jews who had migrated from Bohemia, Moravia or Galicia, predominantly German native speakers. To summarize the ethnic processes which took place between 1796 and 1880, it could be characterized primarily by Slovak ethnic expansion, starting in the second half of the 17th century50. In the course of this 106 Ruthenian, 63 Hungarian, 14 German, 12 Polish (Goral) and 2 Croatian settlements had a Slovakian ethnic majority by 1880. Accordingly, the Slovaks gained 145 settlements (+197 -52), the Ruthenians lost 100 (+10-110), the Hungarians 19 (+44-63), Germans 12 (+4-16), Poles 12 and Croats 2. Along the Hungarian-Slovak ethnic boundary 62 Hungarian settlements51 changed to having a Slovak majority, 14 Slovakian villages gained a Hungarian majority (mainly in Gömör County52), which resulted in a further southward expansion of the ethnic border, especially in Nyitra, Abaúj and Zemplén counties. At the same time, and as a consequence of the pressure of assimilation put on the national minorities, south of the Hungarian-Slovakian ethnic boundary 23 Slovakian and 4 Ruthenian villages became Hungarian, while north of it 106 Ruthenian, 14 German53 and 2 Croatian settlements turned into those with a Slovakian majority. As a result of the ethnic processes outlined above, which was extremely favourable for the Slovaks, and following the Austro-Hungarian Compromise (1867), capitalist industrial development and demographic transition54 started in Upper Hungary. People from certain regions (predominantly Slovaks and Ruthenians) in relatively overpopulated areas where agriculture could no longer support a larger population, migrated both overseas (chiefly from Zemplén, Sáros, Szepes, Abaúj-Torna counties), and to the capital Budapest (mainly from the counties of present-day Central Slovakia).

50 See Kőrösy J. 1898 A Felvidék eltótosodása (Slovakization of Upper Hungary), K. Grill, Budapest, 56 p. 51 Of the mentioned 62 Slovakized Hungarian settlements 14 were found in Nyitra, 22 in Abaúj, and 17 in Zemplén and Ung counties (e.g. Sempte, Szered, Vágsellye, Mocsonok, Ürmény, Nyitra, Nagyemőke, Újlót, Szántó, Gyügy, Ebeck, Losoncapátfalu, Pány, Abaújnádasd, Abaszéplak, Kassaújfalu, Hernádtihany, Kisszalánc, Nagyazar, Magyarizsép, Magyarsas, Nagytoronya, Pálóc, Tasolya, Ungpinkóc). 52 Felsőfalu, Kisvisnyó, Lice, Mikolcsány, Gömörnánás, Kisperlász, Jolsvatapolca, Süvete. (See Keményfi R. 1998 A történeti Gömör és Kis-Hont vármegye etnikai rajza (Ethnic structure of the historic Gömör and Kis-Hont County), KLTE Néprajzi Tanszék, Debrecen, 296p. 53 Towns with a German ethnic majority in the second half of the 18 th century, which turned Slovakian by 1880 e.g. Igló, Lőcse, Szepesváralja, Korompa, Selmecbánya, Bélabánya. 54 The improvement in living conditions, hygiene standards and a gradual decrease in mortality – in the beginning with high birth rates – resulted in a natural increase, in some places in considerable overpopulation.

53

Great numbers of non-Hungarian citizens in the Hungarian state which was celebrating its millennium, threw their lot with the Hungarians. This was especially true of those living in towns (including Jews, Germans and Slovaks) in the atmosphere of Hungarian economic prosperity. A similar voluntary process of re-Magyarization which curbed Slovakization, could be observed within the Hungarian-Slovak bilingual population of uncertain ethnic identity who were Catholic and living in the counties of Nyitra, Bars, Hont, Abaúj and Zemplén. Aside from the process of natural assimilation which took place between the censuses of 1880 and 1910 it is worth mentioning the various Magyarization measures taken by contemporary Hungarian governments to accelerate this process, which had a negative political effect. For example, the establishment and hasty development of a network of Hungarian institutions (kindergartens, primary and secondary schools, cultural and educational societies) in regions inhabited by predominantly non-Hungarians and the nationalist excesses of local administration. The above outlined ethnic processes which were favourable for the Hungarians are still evaluated differently by Hungarian and Slovak experts. On the Slovakian side,55 a dynamic increase in the number of Hungarians in the period at the turn of the century is considered to be forceful Magyarization, and the result of tampering with statistical data. Meanwhile, Hungarians56 claim it was a voluntary process of natural assimilation57. Slovakization in the 18th and 19th centuries, and statistical data of the 1880 Hungarian and of the 1921 and 1930 Czechoslovakian censuses were treated in a similar manner by Slovak experts. During the period between 1880 and 1910 which could be considered favourable for Hungarians and Ruthenians and unfavourable for the Slovaks from the ethnic point of view, the change of the number of settlements with the given ethnic majority showed the following picture: Hungarian settlements +64 (+76-12), Ruthenians +45 55

Pl. Varsik, B. 1940 Die slowakisch-magyarische ethnische Grenze in den letzten zwei Jahrhunderten, Universum, Bratislava, Svetoň, J. 1970 Vývoj obyvateľstva na Slovensku (Change in the population number of Slovakia), Bratislava, Mazúr, E. 1974 Národnostné zloženie (Ethnic structure) — in: Slovensko, Ľud - I. Časť, Obzor, Bratislava, pp.440-457., Žudel, J. - Očovský, Š. 1991 Die Entwicklung und der Nationalitätenstruktur in der Südslowakei, Österreichische Osthefte Jg.33. 2. pp.93-123., Mésároš, J. 1996 Deformácie vo využívaní údajov sčítania ľudu v novodobých maďarskoslovenských sporoch (Differences in the study of census data , Historický Zborník 6 (Matica Slovenska, Martin), pp. 123-135 56 E.g. Kovács A. 1938 A magyar-tót nyelvhatár változásai az utolsó két évszázadban (Change in the Hungarian-Slovakian ethnic boundary during the last two hundred years), Századok, pp. 561-575., Kniezsa I. 1939 A magyarság és a nemzetiségek (Hungarians and the minorities) — in: Az ezeréves Magyarország, Budapest, pp. 91-114., Révay, S. 1941 Die im Belvedere gezogene ungarischslowakische Grenze, Veröffentlichungen der Ungarischen Statistischen Gesellschaft Nr. 14., Budapest, 57 Experts studying ethnic processes from a nationalistic viewpoint – both in the past and in the present – have always considered ethnicity almost exclusively as determined by ethnic affiliation, although "belonging to a certain national community is not a genetic endowment but a result of a social acculturization. The consciousness, behaviour, mentality of people are heavily influenced by the cultural norms, values, models and symbols, prevailing in the society, first of all by a politically governed cultivation of the national idea" (See. Joó R. 1984 Az etnikai folyamatok és a politikai folyamatok néhány összefüggése – Some connections between ethnical and political processes), Társadalomkutatás 1984. 2. pp.98-105.).

54

Figure 10. Change in the population number of the main ethnic groups on the present-day territory of Slovakia (1880–1991)

(+62-17), Poles +2, Slovaks -99 (+38-137). In the last case, 90 villages out of 137, reversing their former Slovakization, returned to the original ethnic majority: 62 Ruthenian, 25 Hungarian, 2 Polish and 1 German. However, the Slovakization of German settlements in the Szepesség area even in this period could not be stopped, and 7 settlements which were still German in 188058 had a Slovakian majority by 1910. As a consequence of German, Jewish and Slovak assimilants declaring themselves to be Hungarians, with a higher natural increase, and relatively lower emigration, the number of Hungarians in the territory of present- day Slovakia grew by 335,000 (+61.8 %) between 1880-1910 (Tab. 8., Fig. 10.). The increase in Hungarians was +168.9 % north of the Hungarian-Slovak ethnic border, comprising areas of predominantly Slovak ethnicity, and it was +36,6 % in the Hungarian ethnic area 59. There was a particularly high number of urban dwellers of Jewish, German and Slovakian origin who declared themselves to belong to the state-forming (Hungarian) nation. Due to Hungarians moving in, and to the language change of the local German and Slovak officials, and the strengthening of the bourgeois, towns like Zólyom, Aranyosmarót, Nyitra, Nagyrőce, 58

Szepesbéla, Alsólehnic, Ómajor, Felka, Strázsa, Szepesszombat, Leibic. The population increase calculated for the territory of the present-day Slovakia was 18.6 % between 1880 and 1910. 59

55

number 2,460,865 2,916,086 2,935,139 2,958,557 3,254,189 3,536,319 3,399,000 3,442,317 4,174,046 4,537,290 4,987,853 5,274,335 5,274,335

% 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Total population number 1,502,565 1,687,800 1,960,391 1,952,866 2,224,983 2,385,552 2,888,000 2,982,524 3,560,216 3,878,904 4,321,139 4,519,328 4,445,303

Slovaks % 61.1 57.9 66.8 66.0 68.4 67.4 85.0 86.6 85.3 85.5 86.6 85.7 84.3

% – – 2.4 3.7 0.5 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1

number – – 72,137 120,926 17,443 37,000 40,365 45,721 47,402 55,234 59,326 56,487

Czechs number 545,889 880,851 681,375 650,597 585,434 761,434 390,000 354,532 518,782 552,006 559,801 567,296 608,221

% 22.2 30.2 23.2 22.0 17.6 21.5 11.5 10.3 12.4 12.2 11.2 10.7 11.5

Hungarians number 228,581 198.461 145,139 145.844 154.821 143.209 24,000 5,179 6,259 4,760 5,121 5,414 7,738

Germans % 9.3 6.8 4.9 4.9 4.5 4.0 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Ruthenians, Ukrainians number % 78.402 3.2 97,037 3.3 92,786 3.2 88,970 3.0 95,359 2.8 85,991 2.4 47,000 1.4 48,231 1.4 35,435 0.9 42,238 1.0 39,758 0.8 30,478 0.6 58,579 1.1 number 105,428 51,937 55,468 48,143 72,666 142,690 13,000 11,486 7,633 11,980 6,800 92,493 98,007

Others % 4.2 1.8 1.9 1.7 3.0 4.2 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 1.8 1.9

Sources: 1880, 1910: Hungarian census data (mother/native/ tongue), 1919, 1921,1930, 1947, 1950, 1961, 1970, 1980, 1991: Czechoslovakian census data (ethnicity), 1991*: Czechoslovakian census data (mother/native/ tongue), 1941: combined Hungarian and Slovakian census data. The data for the present territory of Slovakia were calculated by J. Žudel (Národnostná štruktúra obyvateľstva Slovenska roku 1880, Geografický Časopis 1993. 45. 1. pp.3-17.), by the Hungarian Central Statistical Office (A felvidéki települések nemzetiségi (anyanyelvi) megoszlása (1880-1941), KSH, Budapest, 52.p.) and between 1919 and 1941 by K.Kocsis.

1880 1910 1919 1921 1930 1941 1947 1950 1961 1970 1980 1991 1991*

Year

Table 8. Ethnic structure of the population on the present territory of Slovakia (1880–1991)

Jolsva, Korompa, Eperjes, Varannó, Homonna, Nagymihály suddenly attained an absolute or relative Hungarian ethnic majority (Fig. 11.). The increase in the number of persons declaring themselves to be Hungarian – for the above-mentioned reasons – was especially spectacular in Pozsony and Kassa (Tab. 9.). In the neighbourhood of the Hungarian-Slovakian ethnic border 54 settlements turned into those with a Hungarian ethnic majority and in 11 settlements Slovaks prevailed, i.e. in 25 cases there was some re-Magyarization,60 while in 5 cases there was re-Slovakization,61 taking into account previous ethnic data. For a better understanding of the abrupt changes in statistical data it might be useful to analyse the ratio of the bilingual population. In Upper Hungary their proportion was 18 % among Slovaks, 33 % among Hungarians and 65 % among Germans (!), living mostly in scattered language pockets. It is notable that 21 % of Germans – especially those living in Pozsony and Szepes County – spoke German, Hungarian and Slovakian. Among the settlements with an urban status there was a particularly high proportion of bilingual (Hungarian-Slovak) people, difficult to label by one native language, as in Jolsva, Vágsellye (approx. 70-75 %), Kassa, Ógyalla, Verebély (30-40 %). Within the rural areas the proportion of these people was 35-45 % in the environs of Kassa, Tőketerebes, and Nyitra-Érsekújvár-Léva. At the later censuses they declared themselves to belong to the current nation forming a state, in this way causing significant statistical discrepancies. Although most inhabitants of the 62 Slovakized villages returned to being Ruthenian, owing to intense emigration (mainly overseas) the latter increased their share of the total population of Upper Hungary by a "mere" 23.8 %. At the end of World War I, following the declaration of Czechoslovakia (October 28, 1918) and the formation of the Slovakian National Committee (October 30, 1918), the Czech army supported by the Entente powers occupied almost the entire area of Upper Hungary, i.e. a territory of 61,.592 km.262 This was to be annexed to Czechoslovakia with a population of 3.5 million, 48.1 % of whom were Slovakian native speakers, while 30.3 % were Hungarian, 12.3 % Ruthenian and 7.5 % German native speakers (1910). After excluding the option of a plebiscite which would have provided an opportunity for the local population to express their opinion about the future affiliation with a state of their choice, the Entente powers in their dictate of the Trianon Peace Treaty (June 4, 1920) insisted on the detachment of the Slovak ethnic area together with the Ruthenian, northern Hungarian settlement area and the German (Saxon) blocks of Upper Hungary with a reference to the ethnic, economic and military interests of an ar-

60 Re-Magyarization: e.g. Cseklész, Vágsellye, Nyitra, Gyügy, Szántó, Ebeck, Losoncapátfalva, Pelsőcardó, Pány, Hernádcsány, Kisszalánc, Csörgő, Garany, Magyarsas, Nagytoronya. 61 Re-Slovakizattion: Kural, Jolsvatapolca, Kisperlász, Süvete, Lasztóc. 62 The combined territory of Slovakia and Podkarpatska Rus (c. present-day Transcarpathia) as provinces of Czechoslovakia was 61,592 km2 in 1921 and 61.623 km2 in 1930 (Československá statistika, Svazek 98. 27x.p.). As a result of the border adjustments between 1922 and 1924 Susa (1922), Somoskőújfalu, Somoskő (1924) were returned from Slovakia to Hungary, Javorina (1923), Hladovka and Szuchahora (1924) were annexed from Poland to Czechoslovakia, receiving Nižná Lipnica (1924) in exchange. See: Houdek, F. 1931 Vznik hraníc Slovenska (Formation of the borders of Slovakia), Prúdov, Bratislava, 412.p.

57

Table 9. Change in the ethnic structure of selected Year

Total population number %

1880 1900 1910 1921 1930 1940 1970 1980 1991

66,122 88,981 104,896 122,201 170,305 190,259 305,950 380,259 442,197

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

1880 1900 1910 1921 1930 1941 1980 1991

34,951 49,885 54,331 63,063 81,802 79,855 202,368 235,160

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

1880 1900 1910 1921 1930 1941 1970 1980 1991

2,844 3,841 4,143 4,580 5,290 6,026 8,954 13,217 16,978

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

1880 1900 1910 1921 1930 1941 1970 1980 1991

13,901 21,022 23,051 19,075 22,761 23,410 28,376 32,520 37,346

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

1880 1900 1910 1921 1930 1941 1970 1980 1991

10,584 13,385 16,228 19,023 22,457 23,306 24,962 34,147 42,923

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Slovaks Hungarians number % number % Pozsony - Bratislava 14,617 22.1 10,393 15.7 20,373 22.9 24,500 27.5 22,708 21.7 37,668 35.9 52,038 42.6 26,137 21.4 87,117 51.2 26,974 15.8 99,223 52.2 25,394 13.4 274,294 89.7 17,043 5.5 344,637 90.6 18,731 4.9 401,848 90.9 20,312 4.5 Kassa - Košice 18,311 52.4 11,162 31.9 17,224 34.5 27,031 54.2 13,646 25.1 36,141 66.5 40,145 63.7 12,371 19.6 52,953 64.7 11,711 14.3 15,367 19.2 60,404 75.6 187,501 92.7 8,070 3.9 212,659 90.4 10,760 4.6 Galánta - Galanta 854 30.0 1,657 58.3 788 20.5 2,810 73.2 550 13.3 3,441 83.1 1,089 23.8 3,233 70.6 2,284 43.2 1,771 33.5 876 14.5 5,054 83.9 6,440 71.9 2,452 27.4 8,370 63.3 4,700 35.6 9,810 57.8 6,890 40.6 Komárom - Komárno 269 1.9 12,726 91.5 1374 6.5 18,112 86.2 769 3.3 20,636 89.5 2427 12.7 14,917 78.2 5546 24.4 13,951 61.3 347 1.5 22,446 95.9 10550 37.2 17,498 61.7 11900 36.6 20,022 61.6 12680 34.0 23,745 63.6 Érsekújvár - Nové Zámky 1,526 14.4 8,138 76.9 822 6.1 12,197 91.1 964 5.9 14,838 91.4 7,686 40.4 9,378 49.3 9,561 42.6 10,193 45.4 1693 7.3 21,284 91.3 17,560 70.3 7,152 28.7 24,200 70.9 9,460 27.7 28,680 66.8 13,350 31.1

Germans number %

Others number %

37,000 39,294 39,818 32,573 41,318 40,385

56.0 44.2 38.0 26.7 24.3 21.2

872 1,266

0.2 0.3

4,112 4,814 4,702 11,453 14,896 25,257 14,613 16,019 18,771

6.2 5.4 4.4 9.3 8.7 13.3 4.8 4.3 4.3

4,627 3,588 3,261 2,170 3,385 1,703 72 322

13.2 7.2 6 3.4 4.1 2.1 0.0 0.1

851 2,042 1,283 8,377 13,753 2,381 6,725 11,419

2.4 4.1 2.4 13.3 16.8 2.9 3.3 4.9

329 181 128 38 40 81

11.6 4.7 3.1 0.8 1.0 1.3

7

0.0

4 62 24 220 1,195 15 62 147 271

0.1 1.6 0.6 4.8 22.6 0.2 0.7 1.1 1.6

766 1,235 1,245 730 1,029 338

5.5 5.9 5.4 3.8 4.5 1.4

10

0.0

140 301 401 1,001 2,235 279 328 598 911

1.0 1.4 1.7 5.2 9.8 1.2 1.2 1.8 2.4

846 340 377 235 256 212

8.0 2.5 2.3 1.2 1.1 0.9

18

0.0

74 26 49 1,724 2,447 117 250 487 875

0.7 0.2 0.3 9.1 10.9 0.5 1.0 1.4 2.0

'Sources: 1880, 1900, 1910, 1941 : Hungarian census data (mother/native tongue) (except for Pozsony/ Remark: All data are calculated for the present administrative territory of the cities and towns.

cities and towns of the present-day Slovakia (1880 – 1991) Year

Total population number %

1880 1900 1910 1919 1921 1930 1938 1941 1991

3,547 4,424 4,578 4,989 5,137 6,145 5,233 5,868 13,347

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

1880 1900 1910 1921 1930 1938 1941 1980 1991

7,597 9,786 10,816 11,556 13,975 13,608 14,150 26,502 33,991

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

1880 1900 1910 1921 1930 1941 1970 1980 1991

6,471 10,634 14,396 13,798 17,186 16,641 21,308 24,770 28,861

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

1880 1900 1910 1921 1930 1941 1970 1980 1991

7,339 8,048 9,166 9,296 11,221 9,947 16,238 19,205 24,771

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

1880 1900 1910 1921 1930 1941 1961 1970 1991

5,226 5,748 7,119 6,937 7,413 7,676 9,557 10,980 18,647

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Slovaks Hungarians Germans number % number % number % Párkány - Štúrovo 41 1.2 3,340 94.2 54 1.5 10 0.2 4,397 99.4 12 0.3 26 0.6 4,509 98.5 39 0.8 257 5.1 4,703 94.3 17 0.3 316 6.1 4,722 91.9 31 0.6 1,431 23.3 4,046 65.8 123 2.0 97 1.8 5,099 97.4 5 0.1 69 1.2 5,634 96.0 41 0.7 3,310 24.8 9,804 73.5 3 0.0 Léva - Levice 1,316 17.3 5,806 76.4 451 5.9 1,242 12.7 8,286 84.7 198 2.0 948 8.8 9,618 88.9 208 1.9 3,382 29.3 7,462 64.6 215 1.9 6,886 49.3 5,432 38.9 216 1.5 2,052 15.1 11,246 82.6 216 1.6 1,555 11.0 12,338 87.2 162 1.1 22,100 83.4 4,010 15.1 28,126 82.7 5,165 15.2 6 0.0 Losonc – Lučenec 1,551 24.0 4,449 68.8 404 6.2 1,441 13.6 8,800 82.8 278 2.6 2,055 14.3 11,646 80.9 471 3.3 6,713 48.7 5,760 41.7 594 4.3 9,953 57.9 4,411 25.7 907 5.3 1,987 11.9 14,023 84.3 335 2.0 17,570 82.5 3,514 16.5 20,520 82.8 3,803 15.4 23,272 80.6 4,830 16.7 13 0.0 Rimaszombat – Rimavská Sobota 1,473 20.1 5,484 74.7 185 2.5 741 9.2 7,197 89.4 73 0.9 880 9.6 8,014 87.4 92 1.0 2,750 29.6 6,164 66.3 123 1.3 4,734 42.2 4,736 42.2 130 1.2 997 10.0 8,828 88.8 50 0.5 9,220 56.8 6,770 41.7 11,000 57.3 7,800 40.6 14,256 57.6 9,854 39.8 Rozsnyó – Rožňava 482 9.2 4,374 83.7 285 5.4 369 6.4 5,123 89.1 195 3.4 570 8.0 6,234 87.6 177 2.5 1,163 16.8 5,514 79.5 150 2.2 2,930 39.5 3,472 46.8 191 2.6 530 6.9 7,025 91.5 90 1.2 6,500 68.0 3,040 31.8 7,380 67.2 3,570 32.5 12,271 65.8 5,826 31.2 10 0.0

Others number % 112 5 4 12 68 545 32 124 230

3.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.3 8.9 0.6 2.1 1.7

24 60 42 497 1,441 94 95 392 694

0.3 0.6 0.4 4.3 10.3 0.7 0.7 1.5 2.0

67 115 224 731 1,915 296 224 447 746

1.0 1.1 1.6 5.3 11.1 1.8 1.0 1.8 2.6

197 37 180 259 1,621 72 248 405 661

2.7 0.5 1.9 2.8 14.4 0.7 1.5 2.1 2.7

85 61 138 110 820 31 17 30 540

1.6 1.1 1.9 1.6 11.1 0.4 0.2 0.3 2.9

Bratislava City in 1940), 1921, 1930, 1961, 1970, 1980, 1991: Czechoslovakian census data /ethnicity/.

60 Figure 11. Ethnic map of present-day territory of Slovakia (1910) Source: Census 1910

tificial state formation of Czechoslovakia having twice undergone disintegration since then. From the very beginning of its existence Czechoslovak state administration – similar to that of Rumania and Yugoslavia – put a strong emphasis upon reducing the number of Hungarians in the annexed territories labelling them as enemies, and on the ethnic homogeneization and stabilization ("Czechoslovakization") of their towns and border zones. Between 1918 and 1924 following the change in the state authorities, 106,841 ethnic Hungarians (administrative and military personnel, landowners, etc.) were expelled or fled from Czechoslovakia to the new Hungarian state territory (from Slovakia approximately 88,000).63 At the same time, approximately 70,000 Czech military personnel, civil servants and investors moved to the territory of Slovakia between 1918 and 1921. Some of the Hungarians who stayed in Slovakia (1921: 13,414, 1930: 20.349 persons64) were not granted Czechoslovakian citizenship, and in this way they were considered to be foreign citizens or displaced persons. The authrorities were especially eager to ”Slovakize” the bilingual (Hungarian-Slovak) population with their dual identity as well as the previously Magyarized urban Slovaks, Jews and Gypsies. These two latter ethnic groups, against their own will, were classed as independent ethnic categories of Jews and Gypsies or labelled as "Czechoslovaks" at the censuses. Apart from some spectacular enforced Slovakization in education and culture, the social temptation, political pressure and statistical manipulation (e.g. the registration of military personnel not at their place of residence but at military bases) and serious abuses of authority greatly contributed to a drastic drop in the number of those recorded as Hungarians 65. Between the censuses of 1910 and 1930 the number of Hungarians dropped from 881,000 to 585,000, that is from 30.2 % to 17.6 % on the territory of present-day Slovakia (Tab. 8.). During this period 117 settlements with a formerly Hungarian ethnic majority changed to having a Slovak majority, of these 33 were in the vicinity of NyitraKomárom-Léva, 25 around Kassa, and 22 in the environs of Tőketerebes, i.e. in regions characterized mainly by a population with dual (Hungarian-Slovak) identity. The Hungarian ethnic area near Nyitra became an enclave. The Hungarian ethnic territory along the Ipoly river was severed between Balassagyarmat and Nagykürtös, and the Hungarian ethnic enclaves situated east of Kassa and southwest of Tőketerebes almost completely disappeared in the Czechoslovakian statistics. At the same time as part of the Czech nationalist land reform, 69 colonies66 (with 14,000 Czech and Slovak inhabitants) were 63 Petrichevich-Horváth E. 1924 Jelentés az Országos Menekültügyi Hivatal négy évi működéséről (Report about the activity of the National Office for Refugees), Budapest 64 Československá statistika, Svazek 9. 82.p., Sv.98. 59.p. 65 See: Gyönyör J. 1994 Terhes örökség. A magyarság lélekszámának és sorsának alakulása Csehszlovákiában (Burdensome inheritance. Change in population number and destiny of Hungarians in Czechoslovakia), Madách-Posonium, Pozsony / Bratislava, 32-34., 58.p., Popély Gy. 1991 Népfogyatkozás. A csehszlovákiai magyarság a népszámlálások tükrében (Decrease of population. Hungarians in Czechoslovakia in census data) 1918-1945, Írók Szakszervezet Széphalom Könyvműhely - Regio, Budapest, 112. p. 66 The most important Czechoslovakian colonies (and their Hungarian counterparts) were: Gessayov-Zálesie (Éberhard), Miloslavov, Hviezdoslavov (Csallóközcsütörtök-Béke), Bellova Ves

61

established in the Hungarian ethnic area between 1919-1929. In the southern areas the majority of people living in colonies which were established to break up the homogeneous Hungarian ethnic pattern were peasants, or tenants, officials or soldiers (legionaires) who had settled there from the northern, less fertile regions of Slovakia and Moravia 67. Apart from breaking up the Hungarian rural ethnic block along the state border, which posed a danger of irredentism, another trend was the (actual or statistic) Slovakization of traditionally Hungarian towns which flanked the ethnic border. Staff in public administration were changed (Hungarians for "Czechoslovaks") by dismissing or expelling people in 1919. Hungarian Israelites were grouped into a separate category of ethnic Jews, while assimilation connected with economic considerations (statistical Slovakization) and in some cases changing of effective force of garnisons into foreign ones (e.g. those composed of Sudethan Germans)68 together with their registration in censuses, led to a situation whereby in the towns along the Hungarian-Slovak ethnic boundary "Czechoslovaks" gained a majority69 or equilibrium70 was reached. There was an especially radical drop in the number of Hungarians in Kassa between 1910 and 1930 (Fig. 12.). At the same time, in the territory of Pozsony, the 23,000 Slovaks of 1910 increased to 87,000 with the Czechs by 1930. As a result of accelerated assimilation (Slovakization) the proportion of Germans and Ruthenians also decreased significantly. During this period Germans lost their majority in 10 settlements, including their traditional centres like e.g. Pozsony, Körmöcbánya, Poprád and Késmárk. Ruthenians were forced into a minority position in 44 villages owing to the dissolution of their ethnic blocks during this period. As a result of Slovakization, which accelerated during the 18th and 19th centuries, was curbed after 1867, but recurred as a state supported and enforced process following 1918, the number of Slovaks exceeded 2.2 million, that is, over 68 % in 1930. At the same time, with (Tonkháza), Blahová (Nagylég-Előpatony), Vrbina (Csilizradvány), Hodžovo-Lipové (Tany), Okanikovo (Nemesócsa), Štúrová (Ekel), Violin (Megyercs), Hadovce (Örsújfalu), Nový Svet (Szenc), Hurbanová Ves (Egyházfa), Štefánikov (Taksonyfalva), Hajmaš-Nové Osady (Nagyfödémes), TrnovecNový dvor (Tornóc), Zelený Háj (Ógyalla), Mudroňovo (Madar), Šrobárová (Marcelháza), Mikulášov Sad (Bátorkeszi), Gbelce (Köbölkút), Bíňa-Kolónia (Bény), Čata-Kolónia (Csata), Jesenské, Kulantov (Barsbese), Bozita (Perse), Romháň-Lipovany (Fülekpilis), Šiatorská Bukovinka (Ragyolc), Rátka (Csákányháza), Čierný Potok (Várgede), Bottovo (Dobóca), Slávikovo-Orávka (Rimaszécs). 67 As to the Czech colonization see: Karvaš, A. I. 1928 Hospodárska štatistika Slovenska (Economic statistics of Slovakia), Bratislava, Faltuš, J. - Prcha, V. 1967 Prehľad hospodárského rozvoja na Slovensku v rokoch 1918-1945 (Overview about the economic development in Slovakia in the years 1918-1945), Bratislava 68 The ratio of military personnel within the active population in 1930: e.g. Komárom 23,7 %, Léva 6,5 %, Losonc 24,8 %, Kassa 16,8 %. The ethnic division of soldiers stationed in the Hungarian border zone in 1930: Komárom 71 % Czechoslovak, 27,4 % German, Érsekújvár: 86 % Czechoslovak, 14 % German, Kassa: 66 % Czechoslovak, 26,4 % German. See: Bene L. - Kopcsányi R. 1946 A magyar nyelvterület városai (Towns of the Hungarian ethnic territory in Slovakia) — in: A szlovákiai magyar nyelvterület városai, Budapest Székesfőváros Irodalmi és Mûvészeti Intézete, Budapest, pp.1949. 69 E.g. Pozsony, Nyitra, Léva, Losonc, Kassa. 70 E.g. Érsekújvár, Rimaszombat, Rozsnyó.

62

Figure 12. Change in the ethnic structure of population in selected cities and towns of present-day Slovakia (1880–1991)

63

the appearance of Czechs especially as civil servants and soldiers, their number rose to over 120,000. The process of Czech and Slovak ethnic expansion and the rapid shrinking of national minorities, especially of Hungarians, was stopped by the political events following 1938 and the territorial revisions. Based on the first Vienna Award (Vienna, Palais Belvedere, February 02, 1938), and under German and Italian pressure, Czechoslovakia returned 11.927 km2 of land from Slovakia and Transcarpathia (Ruthenia - Podkarpatska Rus) to Hungary with its population of 1,041,401 (December 15, 1938), of whom 84.4 % declared themselves to be Hungarian native speakers, while 11.9 % were Slovaks71. In the part of present-day Slovakia reannexed to Hungary on November 2, 1938, 857,529 people were registered at the 1941 population census. 85 % (728,904 persons) declared themselves to be Hungarian native speakers, and 13.2 % (113,619 persons) were Slovakian native speakers. Of the population of this "South-Slovakia of Belvedere" 91.4 % could speak Hungarian, 25 % Slovakian, and 16.4 % of them spoke both languages. In the returned territories there were 51 settlements which became those with a Hungarian majority but had been Slovakian in 1930, particularly in the regions of Léva-Érsekújvár, Kassa and Tőketerebes, and these were inhabited mostly by bilingual people with a dual identity (Tab. 10., Fig. 13.). The Hungarian-Slovakian state border basically ran along the ethnic boundary, and some Slovakian ethnic pockets were in the environs of Kassa, north of Sátoraljaújhely and in the area between Érsekújvár and Verebély. Within the almost homogeneous northern Hungarian ethnic area there were not only some older Slovakian ethnic pockets (e.g. Kural, Újgyalla), but Slovaks colonised some settlements in Nógrád and Gömör72 between the two world wars. The "independent" Slovakian state declared on March 14, 1939 had a territory of 37,352.9 km 273. Of the 2,655,053 inhabitants 86.2% were Slovaks, 5 % Germans, 2.9 % Jews, 2.4 % Ruthenians, 1.8 % Hungarians, and 1.4 % Gypsies74. On the territory of the Republic of Slovakia the number of Czech residents dropped from 120,926 to 3,024 75 between 1930 and 1940 as a result of being expelled 71

Magyar Statisztikai Szemle 1939. 5.szám, 456., 477.p. It should be mentioned that from the territory ceded to Hungary the overwhelming majority of Czech and Slovak civil servants who resettled during Czech rule (81,000 persons) withdrew voluntarily, using Czechoslovakian support in October 1938. (Zprávy štátného plánovacieho a štatistického úradu, Bratislava, 1946.10.01., 90.p.). Though some hundreds of Slovaks were expelled from the returned territories, but there was no collective responsibility established for the disbanding of the "common homeland of one thousand years" (Hungary) in 1918. Their Hungarian citizenship was returned and they were not deported to their home country, Slovakia. 73 Hromádka, J. 1943 ibid. 102.p. 74 According to the 1940 Slovakian census, the ethnic division of Slovakian citizens (2,566,984) was the following: 2,.213,761 Slovaks, 129,689 Germans, 74,441 Jews, 61,762 Ruthenians, 46,790 Hungarians, 37,100 Gypsies, 3,024 Czechs. See: Hromádka, J. 1943 ibid. 114.p. 75 The number of Czechs living in Slovakia was 161,000 in 1937, 50,000 in 1950 /Demografická Priručka 1966, Praha, 1967, 46.p./. Their number in Pozsony dropped from 20,764 down to 4,971 between December 31, 1938 and December 15, 1940. /Fogarassy L. Pozsony város nemzetiségi összetétele (Ethnic structure of Pozsony-Bratislava City) — in: Alföld 1982.8. pp.59-74./. 72

64

Table 10. Changing ethnic majority of selected settlements in present-day South Slovakia (1495-1991) Settlement Nyitra Nemespann Verebély Lüle Ény Barsbaracska Alsópél Fajkürt Kolta Szántó Kassa Pány Saca Enyicke Abaújszina Hernádzsadány Eszkáros Beszter Magyarbőd Györke Nagyszalánc Hardicsa Kazsó Garany Magyarsas Nagytoronya Csörgő Alsómihályi Biste

1495 H H H H H H H H H H G H H H G H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

1664 H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

1796 H H H S H H S S S H S H S S H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

1880 S H H H H H S H S S S S S S H H H S H H H H S S S S S H H

1910 H H H S S H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H

1930 S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S

1941 S H S H H H H H H S H H H H H H H H S H S S S H S H H H H

1991 S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S

Remark: Absolute or relative majority of the population: H = Hungarians, S = Slovaks, G = Germans

by the Hlinka Guard76 and on the orders of the minister of the interior. The period between 1939 and 1945 was disastrous for Jews living in the area of present-day Slovakia, owing to discrimination against them and their extermination in the death camps. Between 1930 and 1950 the Holocaust reduced their numbers from 135,975 to 7,476 77. The most populous Jewish communities lived (in areas under Hungarian administration) in Kassa, Losonc, Komárom, Érsekújvár, Dunaszerdahely, Galánta and Léva, in J. Tiso's Slovakia in Pozsony, Nyitra, Nagyszombat, Nagytapolcsány, Zsolna, Eperjes, Bártfa, Nagymihály and Homonna in 1941.

76 Daxner, I. 1961 Ľudáctva pred Národným súdom (Ludak Party before the National’s Tribunal) 1945-1947, Bratislava, 73.p. 77 Deportation and liquidation of the majority of Jews took place in Slovakia in 1941-42, and in Hungary after March 1944. See: Gyönyör J. 1994 ibid. 219-221.p.

65

The above-outlined ethnic spatial structure of the "South-Slovakia of Belvedere" remained until the coming of the military front (October 29, 1944.- April 04, 1945.). There was no massive escape of Hungarians. At the same time, 120,000 out of the 140,000 Germans in Slovakia were evacuated or fled between December 1944 and April 194578. In the areas along the southern border Germans stayed only in Pozsony79 (approx. 9,000) and in Mecenzéf (Lower Zips-Szepesség, 1,600-1,800) until the appearance of the Soviet Army and the Czechoslovakian authorities. After the change of power in 1945, within the framework of the establishment of the Czechoslovak state, ethnic cleansing, which was carefully planned and prepared, totally deprived Germans and Hungarians of their civil rights, and removed their economic foundation. They were made scapegoats for the disintegration of the state and for the war (no citizenship was granted to them, Hungarian civil servants were dismissed, their property confiscated, etc.). This was reflected in the Czechoslovak government program worked out by Gottwald in Moscow and announced in Kassa on 5 April 194580. Declaring the expulsion of all Germans and Hungarians as their essential aim, the Czechoslovakian authorities expelled 31,780 Hungarians out of those in "SouthSlovakia of Belvedere"81. At the same time the remaining German and Hungarian residents of Pozsony were transferred to two detention camps in the vicinity of the town as a first step in the urgent Slovakization of the capital. Based on estimates using census data82 approximately 50,000 Germans and Hungarians disappeared from Pozsony between 1944 and 1950 as a result of evacuation, internment, deportation or expulsion etc. During this time about 70,000 Slovaks moved in. Population gain was also supported by a territorial annexation in 1946 so that the number rose from 138,536 in 1940 to 160,360 in 1950. At the Potsdam Conference, on 2 August 1945, the request of the Czechoslovakian government for a unilateral resettlement of Hungarians from the country was refused (mainly thanks to the USA). As a compromise, at the behest of Czechoslovakia and with Soviet support, the Hungarian government was informed through Allied Control Commission about the possible expatriation of about 400,000-500,000 Germans. This was "unavoidable" in order to create space for Hungarians to be expelled from Czechoslovakia. Parallel with Czechoslovakian diplomatic efforts, within the framework of the land reform of 194583 and under the direction of the Slovakian Office of Settle78 Dokumentation der Vertreibung der Deutschen aus Ost-Mitteleuropa Bd. IV/1. Die Vertreibung der deutschen Bevölkerung aus der Tschechoslowakei, 1957, 171.p. 79 Dokumentation... ibid. 171,p, 80 Dokumentation... ibid. pp.184-203., Janics K. 1993 A kassai kormányprogram és a magyarság "kollektív bûnössége" (Czechoslovak Government Programme of Kassa-Košice and the “collective guiltiness” of Hungarians), Pannónia Könyvkiadó, Bratislava, 50p. 81Jablonický, J. 1965 Slovensko na prelome (Slovakia in break-through), Bratislava, p.398. 82 After Fogarassy L. 1982 ibid. 83 The nationalist land reform was ensured by immediately confiscating land and property formerly belonging to Hungarians and Germans by decrees 27/1945 and 104/1945 issued by the Slovakian National Council (Vadkerty K. 1993 A reszlovakizáció – The Re-Slovakization, Kalligram, Bratislava-Pozsony, p.12.

66

ment a massive settlement of Slovaks started in the "southern zone of settlement" (the areas reannexed to Hungary between 1938 and 1945), with the support of the police. Some more successful Czechoslovakian diplomacy was considered to be the signing of the agreement on population transfer (based on parity) by Czechoslovakia and Hungary (February 27, 1946), under pressure from the Allied Control Commission. According to this agreement the same number of Hungarians living in Slovakia could be forcefully expatriated as those Hungarian citizens living in Hungary who, declaring themselves to be Slovak, were tempted to resettle in Czechoslovakia by various social promises. For the Hungarian government the expulsion of Hungarians living in their ancient settlement area - even in the form of population transfer - was unacceptable. This is why it strove to delay and postpone its implementation. In an anti-Hungarian, chauvinist atmosphere created by a planned and sophisticated manipulation, the Czechoslovakian authorities deported 43,546 Hungarians (5,422 were only six years of age) from 393 settlements in Slovakia to Czech parts of the country84 between October 19, 1946. and February 26, 1947, where they lived in inhuman circumstances. This enforced action, deportation was labelled by a presidential decree of 88/1945. on public work as "recruitment", "involvement in public work", "labour service" or "relocation of the population". In fact it differed from the voluntary employment of Slovaks in the Czech lands by an enforced transfer of Hungarians and an immediate expropriation of their possessions and property which were distributed among Slovak colonists. As a matter of fact, this action was eventually stopped following Hungarian, American and West-European protest and was a warning to the Hungarian government about one of the possible alternatives to the Czechoslovakian solution of the Hungarian issue: either the Hungarian state was willing to receive the Hungarians from Slovakia, or the latter would be distributed more or less evenly over Czech parts of the country. This dispersion still was under way when the Allied States signed the peace treaty with Hungary (Paris, February 10, 1947.), restoring the state borders of January 1, 1938 though they ceded a further three villages (Oroszvár, Dunacsún, Horvátjárfalu) from Hungary to Czechoslovakia. The victorious powers did not agree on a territorial solution to the ethnic tensions which left national minorities in Central Europe without the protection of their collective rights, thus preserving ethnic problems for a long time. At the same time, again on the insistence of the USA, no unilateral expulsion of Hungarians from Slovakia was allowed. Anticipating the dispersion of Hungarians in the Czech lands the government of Hungary was forced to start with the population transfer (April 12, 1947.) 85. On this day the expulsion of Hungarians from Slovakia started (from the Galánta and Léva districts) 86. Owing to disagreements around the property rights and the missing principle of parity, it was a 84 Vadkerty K. 1996 A deportálások. A szlovákiai magyarok csehországi kényszerközmunkája 1945-1948 között (The deportations. The forced labour of Hungarians of Slovakia in Czech Lands between 1945 and 1948), Kalligram, Bratislava-Pozsony, pp.42-43., Kaplan, K. 1993 Csehszlovákia igazi arca (The true face of Czechoslovakia) 1945-1948, Kalligram, BratislavaPozsony, p.136. 85 ibid. 31. 86 Čas, 1947.04.03.

67

slow process which lasted from April 12, 1947 to June 12, 1948 and from December 20, 1948 to September 01, 194887. With this population transfer 68,407 Hungarians were forced to leave Slovakia for Hungary and about 6,000 "of their own free will". 73,273 people from Hungary declaring themselves to be Slovak, although usually without any such identity and hardly speaking the language88, but simply eager to expropriate property that had formerly belonged to Hungarians, were resettled in South Slovakia, as this territory was called89. Apart from the Slovaks of Hungary and colonists from the inner mountain regions, the Czechoslovakian government had managed (with economic promises) to persuade several thousand Slovaks to repatriate from Rumania, Bulgaria, from the Soviet Union (primarily from Transcarpathia) and Yugoslavia 90. According to our investigations, in the borderland districts 236,000 Slovaks moved between 1945 and 1950, who had previously lived in the country or abroad 91. Within the Hungarian ethnic area the centre of Slovak colonisation (and at the same time of the expulsion of Hungarians) were towns situated along the language border (Kassa, Rozsnyó, Rimaszombat, Losonc, Léva, Érsekújvár, Vágsellye, Galánta, Szenc), the main transport zones (main roads and railways) and the most fertile rural regions (e.g. along the Pozsony-GalántaÉrsekújvár-Komárom-Párkány axis, in Garam region, and in the area between Losonc and Rimaszombat, Szepsi and Nagyida). The ethnic composition and statistics of the population of South Slovakia were heavily influenced not only by the migrations already mentioned, but by another form of ethnic expansion, so-called ”re-Slovakization” 92. More than half of the Hungarians frightened and deprived of their rights (381,995 up to January 1 1948), especially those living in towns, in ethnically-mixed villages or who were scattered, applied to call themselves Slovaks. This meant being granted citizenship and staying in their homeland. Only 282,594 of these applications were accepted by the Commission on Reslovakization93, obviously due to a lack of command of the language and due to "racial deficiencies". Of these, owing to the slow consolidation of the political situation, 60,000 Hungarians turned back to their original national status by 1950 and a further 80,000 by 87

Szabó K. - É.Szőke I. 1982 Adalékok a magyar-csehszlovák lakosságcsere történetéhez (Contributions to the history of the Hungarian-Czechoslovak population exchange) — in: Valóság 1982.10.p.93. 88 Obzory, 1947.10.25. 89 Zvara, J. 1965 A magyar nemzetiségi kérdés megoldása Szlovákiában (The solution of the Hungarian ethnic question in Slovakia), Politikai Kiadó, Bratislava, p.36. 90 Of these only the number of repatriants from Rumania was sizeable (estimated at c. 16,000). 91 142,000 of the 236,000 resettled Slovaks colonised the southern territories disannexed from Hungary. 80,000 moved to Pozsony and Pozsonyligetfalu, 14,000 of them settled down in villages formerly predominantly inhabited by Germans. 92 In decree 20000/I-IV/1-1946 of the Office of Home Affairs (06.17.1946.) it was made possible for Hungarians rejecting their original ethnicity to officially declare themselves Slovaks, so getting rid of the inhuman anti-Hungarian discrimination /Vadkerty K. 1993 A reszlovakizáció, Kalligram, Bratislava-Pozsony/ 93 ibid. p.109.

68

1961, while the re-Slovakization of 140,000 of them (predominantly town-dwellers) became permanent. Following these events, the ethnic composition of the "South Slovakia of Belvedere" (the so-called "resettlement area") underwent a profound change between the censuses of 1941 and 1950. The number of Hungarian native speakers (729,000 in 1941) is estimated to have fallen to 451,000 94 by 1950 (from 85 % in 1941 to 52,6 % in 1950). This was as a result of the deportation and emigration of Jews (38,000), the expulsion of Hungarians in 1945 (31,000), the resettlement of 74,000 people to Hungary, a decline following deportations to the Czech lands (20,000), and the loss through reSlovakization. Together with the Hungarians who suddenly "turned into Slovaks" and 142,000 colonists, the number of Slovaks rose here to 370,000, that is from 13.3 % to 43.2 % (1941-1950). The organizers of ethnic cleansing managed to target towns located along the ethnic boundary with a Hungarian majority until 1945 turning them into settlements of Slovak majority95. There was a dramatic southward movement of the Hungarian-Slovak ethnic boundary in rural areas in the vicinity of Léva, Kassa and Tőketerebes, where the greatest Hungarian ethnic loss could be observed (Fig. 14.). To sum up: the Czechoslovakian state, in spite of the anti-Hungarian measures taken and deportations implemented between 1945 and 1948, did not manage to achieve its primary goal, the elimination of the majority of Hungarians in the south of the state. The previously uniform Hungarian character of the border region was, however, broken by Slovak colonization making it more or less mixed ethnically. The intimidation and humiliation of the Hungarian population and the nationalistic and social measures involving the resettlement of nearly 150,000 Slovaks among the Hungarians, further aggravated and conserved internal political and inter-state tensions for a long period, thus hindering the normalization of the Hungarian-Slovak coexistence. As the shocking events of the 1940’s faded, an increasing number of formerly scared and "re-Slovakized" Hungarians reassumed their Hungarian ethnicity in the census statistics. In 1970, there was already a record of 552,006 people claiming Hungarian ethnicity and 600,249 declaring Hungarian as their mother tongue. At best, the latter figure corresponds to the number recorded 80 years ago and falls far behind the 761,434 people whose native language was Hungarian in 1941. In the past decade, the mobility of the Hungarians was increasingly determined by living conditions and the growing disparity between labour supply and demand. The contrast between the urban centre and its periphery became more marked, increasing the mobility of the increasingly open Hungarian rural society along the border. This was primarily manifested in the resettlement of young Hungarians to towns along the lan94

In our survey, ethnic data of the Czechoslovak census of 1950 — similar to that of the 1949 Hungarian census — has not been taken into account, due to the distortions stemming from the intimidation of national minorities. In 1950 a mere 354,.532 people declared themselves to be Hungarian in the whole of Slovakia. With a slow dissolution of this fear, 518,782 persons did so in 1961. 95 The ethnic composition of certain towns had undergone a profound change between 1941 and 1950 due to a drastic drop in the share of the Hungarians: Kassa (from 83,5 % down to 3,9), Rozsnyó (92,7 %-34 %), Rimaszombat (92,7 %-43 %), Losonc (84,5 %-16,4 %), Léva (89,4 %-17,8 %), Érsekújvár (91,3 %-31 %), Komárom (96,1 %-54 %), Galánta (87,5 %-l 4,5 %).

69

guage border which have a majority Slovak population, mostly in Pozsony and Kassa. As a result, the percentage of Hungarians in settlements where Hungarians comprised a minority between 1970 and 1991 increased from 17% to 22.4 %, while the percentage of Hungarians living in a predominant majority (75 % < ) decreased from 63% to 52 %. Natural assimilation, due to intermarriage between ethnic groups in territories with a Slovak majority (in 1982, 27.1% of Hungarian men and 24.7% of Hungarian women chose Slovak partners) was made even more probable by a large amount of migration. For decades, even centuries there has been significant territorial disparity in emigration and birth control. The average age of the Hungarian population is quite high in the territories between Párkány–Zseliz–Ipolyság, in the region near Ajnácskő and Pelsőc, and along the Bodrog-Latorca rivers. On the other hand, the Hungarians of Csallóköz and in part those in Pozsony and the Galánta district demonstrate the most favourable demographic indicators. Their birthrate of 6 per mille in 1983 by far exceeded not only that of the neighbouring Hungarian counties of Győr-Moson-Sopron and Komárom (-0.3 – -0.6 per mille), but also that of the demographically most fertile Hungarian county, Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County (2 per mille). Alongside a relatively modest increase and then a stagnation in the number of Hungarians, came an increasingly identity-conscious Gypsy population and the establishment of an independent Roma category at the 1991 census. Due to a high natural increase in the population of those qualifying as Gypsies, their number has risen dynamically for the past one hundred years (1893: 36,000, 1947: 84,438, 1966: 165,000, 1989: 253,943, 1996: c. 300,000)96. According to a survey conducted during the 1980 census 78.7 % of Gypsies declared themselves to be Slovak (slovačike roma), while 20 % of them considered themselves to be Hungarian (ungarike roma)97. In the 1991 census they were not described but ethnicity could be declared. 75,802 people, 28 % of the Gypsy population, declared themselves to be of Roma ethnicity, and represented the ethnic majority in 9 settlements. Gypsies live predominantly east of the Poprád-Losonc line, especially on the territory of the historical counties of Gömör, Szepes, Sáros és Abaúj, while their largest community is in Kassa City. Within the Hungarian ethnic area they live in Gömör98 (Rimaszombat, Tornalja, Pelsőc, Rozsnyó, Krasznahorkaváralja and environs) and in Nógrád (Losonc, Fülek and environs), but sizeable communities are also to be found in western Hungarian settlement areas (e.g. Dunaszerdahely, Jóka, Komárom, Ógyalla and Sáró) and in eastern ones (e.g. Nagyida, Deregnyő, Királyhelmec and Tiszacsernyő).

96 Jurová, A. 1996 Cigányok-romák Szlovákiában 1945 után (Gipsies-Romanies in Slovakia after 1945), Regio 7. 2. pp.35-56. 97 Gyönyör J. 1989 Államalkotó nemzetiségek (State-forming nations), Madách, Bratislava, 141.p. 98 On certain Hungarian villages in Gömör becoming Gypsy in character and changing ethnic behaviour of the Gypsies see: Keményfi R. 1998 ibid. 296p.

70

THE PRESENT TERRITORY OF HUNGARIAN SETTLEMENT IN SLOVAKIA At the time of the 1991 Slovakian census, of the 5.3 million population of the country, the ratio of the members of state-forming ethnic groups were 85.7 % (Slovaks), and 1 % (Czechs). In 1910 there was a 10.4 % combined number of Germans, Ruthenians99 and Poles (Gorals), though it dropped to 0.7 % by 1991, owing to natural assimilation and expulsion. Though the number of Hungarians (567,.296) had risen considerably compared with 1961 (518,782), their proportion, owing to a dynamic growth of Slovaks, had fallen to 10.7 %. The number of native Hungarian speakers at the 1991 population census was 608.221 (11.5 %). From the administrative perspective, 67.7 % of ethnic Hungarians in Slovakia live in the western regions (Kraj of Pozsony, Nagyszombat and Nyitra) (Tab. 11.). Dunaszerdahely (87.2%) and Komárom (74.2%) can be considered the most “Hungarian” of all the districts. In the districts100 of Vágsellye, Galánta, Érsekújvár and Rimaszombat Hungarians are balanced by the Slovaks, 40–44 % (Tab. 12.). Of the Hungarians in Slovakia a considerable number (at least 100 persons) and percentage (at least 10 %) inhabit 550 settlements. They comprise an absolute majority (50 %